® €^1 ^'A-: ll ^ 1 SJ l' 1 t"' 1^1 1 ^ili'^^y^^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARHATL^ILASPUR PETITIONER .^ ^ .-^^•^ ^s^^ ...•"y x ^ .^•••••?i<vv ^y ^- ^ ^ W.P.ISINO. 6^'^ /2011 Aniruddh Prasad Shukla S/o Baldau Prasad Shukla, aged about 50 years, occupation Service posted as Head Master, Government Boys Primary School Amlibhatta, Block Lormi, District Bilaspur C.G. VERSUS RESPONDENTS / 1. State of C.G. through the Secretary School Education Department , DKS Bhawan Raipur, C.G. District Education Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur C.G. |? 3<The Joint Director Treasury and ^" 2. The Pension, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur C.G. .WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA POR ISSUE OF AN APPROPRIATE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS/CERTIORARI ETC. OR DIRECTION/ORDER IN THE LIKE NATURE ETC. 5 (A ^ fy HIGH COURT OP CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 8B : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PKITINKER DIWAKER W.P.[S).NQ. 6943/2011 PBTITIONBR RESPOEffDBNTs versus Aniruddh Prasad Shukla State of Chhattisgarh Za Others Shri Rakesh Paadey, counsel for flie petitioner. ShriBhaskar Py&si, P.L. for tlie State. WRIT PBTITION UNDER ARTICLB 226 OP THB CpNSTITUTION OF INDIA ORDBR 124.11.2011) Grievaace of tlie petitioner in the present petition is that the petitioner was iiiitiaUy appointed as Assistaiit Teacher on a fixed pay scale of Rs. 150 aad after conipletion of probation, he was granted regular pay scale ofRs. 169-300, Conteution of fhe counsel for the petitioner is that he is entitled for regular pay scale with effect from the date of initial appouitnient aad his case is squarely covered with number ofdecisions passed by fhis Court aad also the judgment rendered by the M.P. State Adraiiiistrative TribuBal, Jabalpiir ia O.A. N0» 274S/89 ^Ses^&hukant Ya&u & 56 Others Vs. State ^fM,P< & Otfeers^where io it has been held tliat siinilarly placed teachers are entitled for rcgiilar pay scalxs froia fhe date of ftieir iiiitial apponittiient, It is uot disputed by bofh. ftie par'ties that the inatter was taken up by fhe State to fhe Apex Court but the appeal was also disniissed by tlie Apex Court upholding the decision of the Tribunal to tlie effect tiiat the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitled for regular pay scale from. the date of tlieir iaitial appoiutment. In view of the above subniission inade by the counsel for the parties, ttie petition is disposed of m the same terms i,e. tbe petitioner is graiited liberty to make a representation, if so advised, ia ^,.^'73^3-'^ ^y'--—-^^ /" €^ 1\ . ^ ] \w-'y./ 9-5 the Ught of fhe aforesaid judgment aad the circular dated 5.1.2011 (Anuexure P/5) aiid m tum, the conceiTied respondent is directed to consider fheir case on its own merits aiid m its perspective. If tlie petitioner staads on thie same footmg as per order passed by tlie State Admmista-ative Tribunal in Madhukant Yadu (siipra) and subsequeutly confirmed by fhe Supreme Court m Special Leave Petition (Civil) N0. 6892/93 by order dated. 03.01.95, the petitioner may be eutiUed to same reUef accordmgly. It is expected from the State authorities to pass suitable order after diie scrutiny oftiie facts, It is made clear tliat this court has not expressed aiiy opmion on the merits of the case aad tlie autliority concemed woiild be at liberty to decide fhe representatiou strictiy ui accoixlance witli law. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge