CQUSTQFCHHATTISGAKH AT_B!LASFIj] IT PETITIQN (S) No. 3544 OF 2007 Nandkumar Patel, Aeed about 43 Yeare, S/o Chandrika Prasad Patei, Assistant Teacher, Govt. Middle School, Suti P./o Village Bhupdevppur, Taiisil Kliarsia, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) 1. State of Chhattisgarh Throu.gh Secretan--, School Education Depai-tmeat D.K.S. Bhawaii, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Director Public Instmction Department Raipur (C.G.) 3. District Education OfBcei- Raigarh District Raigarh (C.G.) 4. Block Education Officer Kliarsia Distt. Raigarh (G.G.) . 5. Assistaiit Conmiissioner Tribal Welfare Department Raigarh (C.G.) WRTT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CQNSTrTUTION OF INDIA. Present: Shri Anil Mourv'a. Advocate for the petitioner. Sliri A.S.KacMiwaha, Govt. Advocateforthe State/fespondents. 1. 3. (Passed on 26m day of June, 2007) The questioa of law invo'ved herein is asto whether the petitioner is entitled to re.eular pav scale w.e.fthe date of initial appointment or fi~om the date ofcompletion ofprobation period. Learaed counsel appearing for the petitioners as we51 as fbr the Stats/respondeats jointly subuiit that the facts and question of law involved ia the present writ petition arethe same as to that ofin W.P.(S) No. 5976/2006 (SasMI Tiwari and others Vs. State Oflverronent of Chhattjsgarh & Others),which was allowed vide order dated 7.11.2006. However, the State Goveniiiient is at libertx' to verify tlie appointmeait of the petitioner ia order to fmd out whether the facts ofthe present case are identical to that ofW.P.(S) No. 5976/2006 (supra), In view ofthe above-stated siibmissions made bv leamed counsel for the parties, the writ petition is allowed in the saine t.srm.s. No order as to costs. • • ;„ , < ^ Sd/- Satish K.Agnihotri , Judge .; .i\mt