r^ HIGH COURT OF GHHATriSGARH: BiLASPUg Writ Petition (S) No. 3166 o¥2008 Petitioner Siddha Ram Ratre, S/o. Shri Sew®kRam Ratre, aged about 41 years, Asstetasnt Teacher, Government Pnmary School, Naurangpur, Block - Bemetara, District Durg (CG). Respondente Versus 1) State of Chhattisgarh, througn Secretar/, Educatlon Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Ralpur (CG). 2) District Education Officer, Ralpur, District Durg (CG), 3) Biock Education OfRcer, Bemetara, District Durg (CG). CWrit Petition underArtscte 226/227 ofthe Constttution of jndia.) SB: Hon'bte Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Presenfc Shri V.K.TeRam, counsei for the petitioner. Shri Arun Sao, Go\'t. Advocate forthe State. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 25th day ofJyn®,2008) With consent of learned counsei appearing for the parties, the matter is heard finatiy. 2) Learned counsel appearing for the petitionef submits that the petjttoner was appointed as Assistant Teacher in 1993 on a fixed pay soale of Rs.SOO/- for a period of two years. After compietion of two years probation, the petitioner was granted regutar pay scale. He further submits that the issue inwivedin the case Is asto whether the petitioner is entitied to r^uiar pay soaie with effed from the date of initiat appointment or after compietion of probation perlod. 3) The issue invoived herein was considered by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative TribunaS, Jabalpur in O.A.No.2745/89 { Madhukant Yadu and 96 others Vs State of M.P. & others), wherein it was heid that the simiiariy situated teachers are entiti^S to reguiar pay scale w.e.f. the date of initiai appoEntnient. The c\ p-^ -2. 'Y matter was taken up to the Hon'bte Supreme Court. The appeai was dismissed by the Hon'bte Supreme Court, upholding the decssion of the Tribunai to the effect that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entltled to regular pay scale from date of initiai appointment. 4) in view of the above stated submissions made by iearned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of in the same terms i.e., frie petitioner is grantej liberty to make a representation, if so advised, to consider the petitioner's case, if he stands on the same footings as per order dated 24-8-1992 by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunat, Jabatpur, in OA.No. 2745 of 89 (Madhukant Yadu (supra) and subsequently confirmed by order dated 3-1-1994 passed by the Hon'bie Supreme Court in Speciai Leave Petition (Civil) No. 6892/93 and grant relief accordingly. 5) Sn view of foregoing, the petition is disposed of. No order as to cosfcs. Raju Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge