// e/oaim/f/ (O IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No.5g9 g /2o1o PETITIONERS 1 . VERSUS /1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Education Mantralaya, D .K. S. Bhawan, Raipur, (C.G.) /2. INDIA 1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER: As per cause 'itle. 2. PARTICULA As per cause ‘tle. $§ME£E 3E§§€3H Bhiya Ram Kashyap S/o Shalik Ram Kashyap aged about 56 Years, presently working as Upper Division Teacher in Govt. Middle School Kuryari, Block '— Nawagarh, Distt. Janjgir ~ Champa (C.G.) Chhote Lal Aditya S/o Dhana Ram Aditya aged about 59 Years, presently working as Head Master in Govt. Primary School Kansda, Block ~Nawagarh, Distt. Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) The District Education Officer, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) Block Education Officer, Block - Nawagarh Distt. Janjgir—Champa (c.G. x WRIT UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF ) S OF THE RESPONDENTS: i HIGH COURT OF CHHATTESéAki-é AT BELASPUR / 5ingie Bengh : Han‘bie 9M. Jumae PriTiakgr Diwakar‘ Writ Pan‘i‘mn (5) No. 5898 of 2010 PETITIONERS Bhiya Ram Kashyap & anofher‘ Versus RE5PONDENT5 Sfm‘e 9f Chha‘?’risgar'h and ofher’s. Mr. Ashwani Shukia, caunse! for Tha pefi?i0ners. Mr. Vaibhav 6ovewhan, PL fer fhe smfe. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICL£ 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION GF INDXA G R D E R %\ (mamma) The pefi‘fioners were appaim‘ed as Assismm‘ Teacher an a fixed pay af Rs.150/—. Affer comple‘rion of Their probafion periad, They were gmm‘ed regumr‘ pay scale (7f 169—300/—. 2. Learned counse! appearing for #he petiTicner‘s That The issue invclved in The case is as To whaher, 1‘he pefi‘Honer‘s are en’rifled fo reguiar' pay scale wifh effec’r from The dm‘e of inh‘iai appoinimem' or" affer‘ comple’rion of probaf§on period. ~ 3. The issue invoived herein was considered by The Madhya Pradesh STaTe Administra’rive Tribunai, Jabaipur in {1A. No.2745/89 (Madhukan‘f Vadu and 56 ofhers v. S‘ra‘fe of MP. & ofhers), wherein i'i was held fha‘i fhe simiiarly sifuaied ix: Teachers are enih‘ied fa reguiar pay scale wiih effecf from ‘rhe daie of inh‘ial appoin’rmen’r. The maffer was faken up ‘i'a fhe Hon'bie Supreme Courf in Special Leave PeTi'iion (Civii) No.6892/93. The said pei‘i‘fion was dismissed by The Hon'ble Supreme Cour? uphoiding fhe decision of The Tribunai fo The ‘ effecf Thai the Teachers/Assisianf Teachers are enfi'iied To regular pay scaie from fhe da’re of ini‘iiai appoini‘mern‘. m/b [w ¢ 4-. Learned counse! appearing for fhe pe‘?i‘?§oners fum‘her submi‘rs Tha? #his Court while considering ‘rhe same issue in Amer Sai Ram (3i ofher‘s v. Sfcn‘e cf Chhai'fisgarh & a’rhers (WP. (S) N0.4725/2006) by order dafed 01/09/2006, aliowed The petitioners ”re make a represenm‘l'ion wifhin a period of fen days raising aii Their grievances. 5. Accordingiy, fhe pe'ri'iioner is gran'fed iiber‘iy 1‘0 make represenia’rion raising all his grievance in The iigh‘i of fhe aforesaid judgmen‘i’ and The circuiar daied 13/01/2009 (Annexure 'P/2) and in Turn, The concerned responden‘i is direc‘ied ‘i’o decide fhe represen‘icn‘ion, if any, in accardance wi‘i‘h iaw, on i‘rs own merifs, wi‘ihin a period of S weeks from The daTe of receipf of fhe represenfa‘iion subjec‘i To verifica‘iian of the facfs. 6. In View of The foregoing, fhe pe'i'ifion is disposed of. No order as To cosfs. Sd/— Pritinker Diwaker Judge ... ....