Service SB. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION.NO. Eng-n l 2006 PETITIONERS :-x1. Mamkchand Gupta S/o Pragag Sao, aged about 42 years, U.D.T., Govt Girls Higher Secondary School, Koosami District — Sarguja . ‘ J8. Kashinath Sahu,S/o Hauliram Sahu, aged about 43years,Head Master,Govt. Middle School Andhela, BlockLakhanpur District— Sarguja Muran Ram S/ o Loknath Ram, aged about 40 e'a‘rs U D T Govt Boys Hlgher Secondary School, Koosami Dlstrlct- SarguJa. Naval Sai ,S/o Danduram, aged about 40 years, U.D.T., Govt. Boys Higher Secondary School, Koosami District— Sarguja. Smt. Kamila Tigga,W/o Adward Tigga, aged about 43 years, Superintendent, Govt. __Girls Aashram, Koosami Districtj Sarguja. Jamial Tigga, S/ o Shilbanus Tigga, aged about 42 years, Govt. Middle School Karakalli, Koosami, District Sarguja. I Mangana Ram,S/o Brij Mohan Ram , aged 42 years, U.D.T., Govt. Middle School, Harri, Koosami Distriet— Sarguja Ramesh Kumar Bhagat,S/ o Bhookha Ram, aged about 4O years, U.D.T., Govt. Middle School, Ram Nagar Koosami District— Sarguja #9. .Ramji Lahare,S/o Heerasai Lahare, aged about 44 years, Head Master, Govt. Middle School, Tara Block—PremNagar,District— Sarguja. {10. Arun Kumar Kujur,S/ o Shyamvel Kujur, aged about 40 years, U.D.T., Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School, Koosami, District— Sarguja VERSUS RESPONDENTS' I State of C G Through Secretary, Department Hlgher Educatlon D K S Bhawan, a ”Raipur € C G7.) , p / V (aby _,.. @@ f2. Commissioner, Public Instruction, Raipur Division, Raipur (C.G.) r 3. Commissioner,TribalWelfare department, Raipur (C.G.) ER ARTICLE 2261227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. ‘ PETITION UND SWGLE BEMH u i W’WqgE MR§M1§HKhAGbR|M¢¥Rh¢ WET PETITIGN-‘SJ MO.8$18;W 2063' , Manikchand $uph: amwsms :s V$T$H5V 7 sma¢C6mdothets , WRFI’ PETITIQM€§il NQQQZZQFZEE' * V$¥$H5 Mr. B.P.'Guphv, counsil for thapohionen in=;W.P;(S;§a.. No.6019&006i‘“ Mr. A.$.Ra’jput~, counsel ia'rvthe petitfenet in WP.(3.) , No.6022l2006; ' ‘ Mts. Anju Ahuja; Depuw Govammentwmmfwethe t respondentS/State in’WzP.(Si)' Na.&019/2006. Prasant; : Ms.. Deepaliw Pandey Pam! Laws! in: tho mpondenBWte’in W;P.'(S‘.)' No6022l200$ ‘ (Passed: on '6m of November; 2006) By: misupatitionwundir WW7 «WWW of India. the. petitionets seekadire¢tion:to the respondonwto payvtha _ 6E / increments. and seniorilw on, :he» Vba§isuef the daw of, thew‘zimtialvr appointment in the; light:otmaadecisvlonrrendaiedxbyumedoamed3m Administrative Tribunai; Jabaipur. in Griginai Appkation No.1452 of 1998 (Haifsh Chandi SingbandothersvsSMoofmP mm ' datad 331 '-~1-260QV ,OiiginaLApplicah'on N92802: $1998:(Akhiladlim « Appliaatiun No.99; of: 199a (Ramayan PM Wandaiastsavs. _ ShbafMP. WOW) ‘1 2. Learned counsel‘ appeatingfat: unpemmplmdon - ' WribPetih‘an (8.} N0;5593:of'2wa:(8mt AshaEklmmawWmd‘ f. another: vs. SWef Ghhaiiwyam w whys} mmmm pwtianers ara— simiiatiy swam-mamas, 1hmsimihr ordarmay her— passed 3. The present wtit petitions; being Writ Pm":($-.)H queaian‘v ofkiaw; Thus. these: petitiensi are“ being: dkposed, eitbyvmisu g commonorder. ~ a 4. t vTheucases ofihe, petitioners aruhathay wereappointedu compleh‘enoftvm yeais’ probation, thepeWonets we": regumke‘d; but, meywwerenotgiven: therfegulat pey-seaie Warsimimiy situatedgx team's.mavedzthe‘Stateg-Adminiskative.Ttibunak. Jabawwm’ madam: pay-scale; Whezein vieamed“ Tribunal; wide). owe: :ddedw 31-1-20mg / aliewaddhe same. The. petitioners made‘vse’verai :mprasentatimio' accord the same‘traahnmtwas Mare» also similarlysitaawimhm but. theytespendamvhave notpam any heed; Thus this peiiuon; 5. Learned counsel appeacing for the vMonom submlathat» ‘ the petitioners may bevauowed-te make. avrepreaentatiomo‘tespmdem: No.1 to give similar treatment‘to‘ the Mmemand Swarm pay‘scalaa which has been sanctioned::to otharmsimilatly, situatedxteachers‘ on accaunt- of the arm of therStataiAdminisuative- Whunddatadxm 4-. 2000, to which learned counselvappearing farms rasp¢ndanwshtex hava no objection. 6. Having heardr teamedcaunsal'fer mekrpaniasgzw‘havmg: 0 regard‘vm tha facB and circumstances, 6f ma main 01a: opinimrof this r Comtytha Vrlimitsd:7ptayarmade aby learned, caunscicappeariny .fer the , petitioners appears tn be raasunabiee Therefore; the potih'onaa. are, ~ allowed to makes a. representation Minnavpariodoftwomfrom ~ today-lo respondent: No.1, raisinn‘all their grievanoesr and, in urn, ' respondent NoAzshell decidedheseid .repreoemhon in on obioww: manner-within a~ period‘of: 30 days- from the? detect receipt: of sum r representation, after considering all the poinisnedwbythe petitioners and hiring into amount: theorder dated 31-1-2000 peweda-by aha) in Ieamed :steteAdminIsualive Tribunal inerbimi Application Na‘1i452‘ of 1998, and if thepetitioners stand on the samevfoon‘nwyasxthew petitioners in theQriginal Application. No.1 45a at 1998,; Mou¢~tl1ey~be> also‘sanclioned the samepey-seaieandseniority r@ 7. The writ petitions amaocotdingly disposedof wit tha' aforesaid direction. Navorder as to casts. .8. A copy of mis order 'bawpiaoadwoname recard sof me' connected wit petigon. \ ‘ ‘ Sd/— f Satish K. Agnihotri Judge 60W x