W%< Q) l } Singla %mh N THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF C ‘ HATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No.3 2m [20.11 /Keshav‘ Madhav Pandey S/o s‘hri Babulal Panday . about 56 Years occupatio Lecturer, Govt. Higher Secondaxy School Katghora, Block Katghora Distt. Korba (C.G.) PETITIONER VERSUS RESPOINDENTS: 1.//State of Chhattisgarh hrough Secretary, Tribal Welfare Deportment, V ’ D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, (C.G.) é. Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Deportment, Raipur District Raipur /(C. G.) 3'. Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Deportment, Korba /’District Korba (C.G.) 4. Joint Director, Treasury,accounts, pension, Bilaspur District-Bilaspur (C. G.) WRIT UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF A ‘ INDIA I n T WWWW . (MCQM'SRQ l 00 mm mm (Wu) WWW wmm mm?m m :B :‘ on e n 24-06-2011 E $hri Amit Shamia counsei for th petitionere Shn AV Shndhar Panel Lawyer orthe Sjtaie Heard on admission Learned counsel appeanng‘fort e petiiioner submits that the petitioner is entitied‘to‘grant of regutar pay scale fr m the initial date of appointment in view’ of circular dated 5i01/201 1(Annexure P 2), issued by the State Government and in .view of order passed (by-the Madhy Prades‘n $tate Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A.No.2745l89 (Madhuka t Yadu and 56 others v. State of MP. 8. others), which, later: on attained ti ality, as SLP. against the same, was ’dismi‘ssed by the Supreme Cami ai Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents may ’b directed to consider the case of the. petitioner. On the other'hand, learned‘coun el for the respondents submits that if the, petitioner claims beneht of'Circular dat d 5/1/2011, the petitioner ought to have first approached the respondents, ctaim g such beneht. Taking into consideration the s missions made by the parties and also taking into consideration that orders" ave been passed in number of cases; petitioner is granted liberty to approac respondent authorities, ciaimtng benefit based on circular dated Sit/261 1. tf the petitioner stands on the s me footings as per order passed by the SAT in Madhukant Yadu (Supra) and ubsequently conftm1ed by the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) c.6892/93, the petitioner may be entitted to same relief. With the aforesaid observations, he petition stands finaily disposed off. i WW§WW éaa‘fiinm i amn ra o an :i rlvas ‘ va