HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR WR'T PET!T!QN 'Si No. 343S of2007 PET!TI©NE8S K.a RESPONDENTS 1. Shravan Kumar Sahu, Aged about 44 years, S/o. Shri Munni Ram Sahu, Assistant Teacher, Primary School, Korampara, Block Narharpur, 2. Lachchu Ram Mandavi, Aged about 47 years, S/o. ShriKanwai Singh Mandavi, Assistant Teacher, Primary School, Bansagar, Block Narharpur 3. Pawan Kumar Chakradhari, Aged about 47 years, S/o. Prem Pal Chakradhari, Assistant Teacher, Primary Schooi, Musurpuha, Block Narharpur 4. Shyam Kumar Nstam, Aged about 45 years, S/o. Shri Bhav Singh Netam, Assistant Teacher, Primary School, Anjani, Block Kanker 5. Narad Ram Thakur, Aged 48 years, S/o Shri Faguram Thakur, ^ssistant Teacher, Primary School, Karwa, Block Narharpur, All are at Distt. Kanker (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Schoo! Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, (C.G.) 2. The Director, Public InstrucUon, Raipur 3. District Education OfRcer, Kanker District Kanker (C.G.) 4. Block Educatlon OfRcer, Kanker (C.G.) 5. Btock Education Officer, Narharpur, Kanker (C.G.) 6. Treasury & Funds Department, Kanker ^ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Single Bench : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihofri Present: Mr. D.N. Prajapati, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Arvind Dubey, Panel lawyer for the respondents/State. _"^.; F""3"'' •."> \..- '^. Karuna —^' ORDER (Passed on 22"a day ofJune, 2007) The question of law involved herein is asto whether the petitioners are entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment or from the date ofcompletion of probation period. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as wetl as for the respondents/State jointly submit that the fects and question of law involved in the present writ petition are the same to that of in W.P. (S) No. 5976/2006 (Sushil Tiwari and others vs. State Govemment of Chhaffisgarh and others), which was allowed vide orderdated7.11.2006. In view ot' the above-stated submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the parfes, the writ petition is allowed in the same terms. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K.Agnihotri Judge ?-