HIGH COIJRT OF CHHATTI8GARH AT BIIASFU1 :vusu-sss, Baiiafer, aged about 35 years, Heai Prathnuk Balak Shala, Dayalband, Block Bilha, Distt. Bilaspur, (C.G.) VERSUS 1) The State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Seeretary; School Educatioa Dejartmeat, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2) The Dii'ector, Public Iiisti-uctioa Department, Distt. Raipw (C.G.) 3) District Educatiou Qffieer, Bilaspiir (C.G.) 4) Block Education OfBcer, Blook Bi.Uia. Distt. Bilaspur(C.G.) • " • wRn' pE'rmoN IINDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE coNSTmrnoN OF INDIA shri K.S.Pawar, Advecate for tfae petitioner. Miss Suiiita Jaiti, Panel Lawyer forthe State/resj (Passed on 17"' day of Januar}', 2008) The petitionerwas appointed on 19.11.1977 ou probation for a period of' two vears as Assistant Teacher on a fixed pav of Rs. I56/-. completion ofhis probation, he was ^anted regular pay scale. 2. Leamed eounsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue -'&^ involved in fhe case is asto whether, the petitioner is entitled to regular pay scale with con 3. The issue involved herein was coasidered bv tfae Madhva Pradesh State Jabalpur in O.A. No. 2745/89 (Madhi; Yadu and 56 others Vs. State ofM.P. & Others), whereia it was hdd that the smrilarly situated teachers are entitled to regular pay scale with eftect from the date of initial appomtment.. The matter vvas taken up to d the Hon'ble Supreme Coiul. The appeal was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court upholding the decision ofthe Tribunal to the effect that 'guiar pay scale the date ofinitial appomtment. [ff rl'f\ys<3^r'i!pI'n~?¥^<TT TI^£> vt.tVtf^- 'acc'^'ajp' irt i/<awt «'ni'yvT>'!;a'»* ?Kiaa'*iii ATr S ti"l~. 1.1^.' ^'VlJlEitUli.'AiEiii U.£<w iStiiJtIC' AOiSUCr 111 ^YO.ill 1YU111(31 OeiAlU tXr '^'U^ •ctf Vs. State Govt. ofChhattisgarh & another, W.P.(S) No. 813 of2007, by Leamed counsel appearing for the parties jointly sulaait that the case is squarety covered by the deeision of this Court in fhe ease of Ram Kumar Sahu & Others Vs. State Govt. of Chhattisgarh 6. In view of that, flris petitian is allowed in the same tenns, subject to verification ofthe facts. No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotn Judge