HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILA8PUR PETITIONERS WRIT PETITION (S) No. 3816 of2807 : 1. Ku. Cosflea LaJa-a, A^d about 54 years, Daug}rter of Late Jdurn Latei, Head Master, Deepak Middle School Shatitipara, P.0. Batauli, Distriet Surguja, Ambikapur (C.G.) 2. Ku. Virginia Xalxo, Aged about 58 yeais, Daughter of Late Ignatius Xalxo, AssistaHt Teacher, Deepak Middle School Sliantipata, P.0. Batauli, District Siu^uj^ AmbSsayw (C.G.) 3. Prabhudayal Tiikey, Aged about 50 yeats, S<wi of Shri Manyu twksy, Assistaat TeaAa, Deepak MiAfle School, Shai^paia, P.0. Batauli, District S urgBJa, AmMaqiur (C.G.) 4. Ku. Celestiaa Elika, Aged about 66 yeai-Si Daughter of Late SimoH Ekka^ Assistant Teacher, Deepak Middk Sehool Shantipata, P.0. Batauii, District Surguja, Ambik^iur (C.G.) VERSUS : 1. State of Chhattisearii, ttooBg^i Seeretary, Tribal We^re Departmeat, MaAdaya, D.K.S. Hiawan, Raip].u-(ChhattisgaA). 2. Conuiiissioaer, Tribal WeSfate Depafftiaeat, DistrietAmbikapa-(Chhattisgarii). 3. Catholio Saisthaa Su%BJa, DalE^lia Parikshetra, Bidiop's House, Ambikapur, throu^i Nirdeshak, Bishop's Htaise, Ambikapur (C.O.) WRTTPETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE eONSTmJFION OF INDIA Slngle Bendi: Hon'bte Jastfce Shri SaUsh K. Aauhotrt. Present: Shri Anupam Dubey, Advocate for tliepetitiotws. Smt Anju Ahuja, Dy. Govt. Advocste fortheStateAespomdentNo. laad2. ORDEa (Passed on 4U day of July, 2007) RESPONDENTS 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitfonCTS subnrits that tiie petitioners are teachers workii^ in Ae respondent No. 3 iBstitute. The petiti<mers ai» entifled to grant rftiie Fiflfa Pay Commission in te Ught offeeju^BMnt and order dated 6.2.2007 passed by this Court in Ifae case of Snrt. A. LaU 4. ^ Vs. State ofChhattt%arh & OUicrs (W.P. No. 4108 of2005) mth other connected matters. Leamed counsel further suhmits fhat tfus case is squarely covered <m Sasts as well as on question oflaw by fhe decision ofthis Court in the mater of SmL A. Lall Vs. State of CUhattisgarii & Others and other coanected matters (supra). Leamed counsel amearing for fhe respondents No. 1 aiid 2/State suhcrits that Ae petitioners have not filed any document iadicatiag asto whetter the petitioners are appointed witiun the sanctioned post aad tfae sdiool is GovemBient aided. In view ofthat, Ifae vwit petition is allowed in fire same tenns passed by this Court in the matter of Smt A. LaB Vs. State of Caihatti^lh & Otfaera and other connected matters (sup-a), subject to verificatian asto whether Ifae respondeirt No. 3 Institute is a Grovemment aided schod a»d the petitioners are teacher within the sanetioned strength. Sd/- ii , Satish K.Agnihotri Judge ¥• Anat