SWGLE BENCH J - ( O'O o ^. ^ r IN THE HON»BLEHIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. (S) No.LI(^1/ /2011 PETITIONER: '...A<y -'<-^..- .^n/^ €^-r' "^""/ Raj Kumar Joshi S/o Shri Lalgiri ^>^ Joshi aged about §4' years, presently working as Head Master ^ ^^ .^ at Govt Primaiy School, Pachpethi Block- Masturi Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) ^* ., ^% --e^^y VERSUS RESPONDENTS: y 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through: - S6cretary, Department ofEducation Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, (C.G.) 2. The District Education Officer, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 3. The Block Education Officer Block- Masturi Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) 4. Joint Directof, Treasury, accounts, pension, Bilaspur District-Bilaspur (C.G.) WR1T UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA A\ H£OHCOURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 8B : HON'BLE 8HSU JU8TSCE PRITXNKBR DIWAKBR W.P.(SL»ro,41T4Z2011 PBTITIONER Ra] Kumar Joshi Versus RESPQIDBNTS • ! State ofC.G. 8& Ofb.ers WRIT PBTITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/22T OP THE CQM^l!TUT!QI_aP INDIA Assoearaace: Slui Ashwini Shukla, counsel for the petitioner, Shri N.Naha Roy, P.L. for th.e State. ORALQRDER (01.08.2011$ Witihi the consent offhe partieSy tlie m.a.tter is heard. fmally, The petitioner was- ini.tially appointed as Assistaiit Teacher OB a fixed pay ofRs. 150, After coiDpletion of his proba.ts.an period, he was graiited regiilar pay scale ofRs. 169-300, Leamed couiisel for the petitiosier submits that the above issue has beea considered by fhe M.P, State Adtimiistrative Tribunal, Jabalpur m O^A. JVo* 274S/89 between SSeidhuknnt Ttw&.u cmSi S6 cthers ys» Steste o/M»P. cyu2 ethers, whereia it was held that 'the similarly situated teachers are entitled to regular pay scale with effect from the date of rmtial appoisitmeBt. The niatter was taken up to the Honyble Supreine Court, The appeal. was disHiissed by fhe HonT^le Supreme Court upholdmg the decision of fhe Tribunal to flie effect that the Teacfaers/Assistaat Teachers are entitled to regiilar pay scale from. fhe date of mitial appoiii'tmerit It is farther submitted that .this Court while considermg the same issue in Wr*P. (8) No. 472S/2006 between Affwr Sed JRcun & Others Vs. StaSx of ChHeMiagarh onet Others by order dated 01.09.06 aUowed the petitioners to make a representation witliia a period of ten days, ralsiag aU. fh.e grievances, ^s 1 fa.' ^-ft' ''.^.^f-i-' ^' ^ Accordiagly fhe petitiorser is granted Uberly to make a representation raisiag all his grievances ia the Ught of the aforesaid judgment aiid tlie circular dated 05.01.2011 (Annexuret P/2), and in tani fhe coiicenied rcspondent is directed to decide the representation, if aiiy, in accordance with law^ on its own merits^ within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of fhe represente.tion subject to verification of fhe facts< In view of fhe foregoiag, this petition is disposed o£ No orier as to costs. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge