(F PF' C^^^f / Ih4 THE UI6H CQURT Qf JUDICATURE CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (S) N0. LJ^SL'T •f 2006 "sTiTiorsers ^10"^^ t/7''\£?y'"' ^s^ ^•-A$^""- <^yy %-co^ B£c T / ^, as^w^ •ys ^s. A,msr bai Kam S/o Shri Dukhana Ram, Aaed about 43 years. n.3.3i. i&udic>i- Gi'>Jvoi-iitiic/fi i rf itiiui y School, PoTedand, Baikur.tpur , Dlst ; Korea-(C.<5.) "hu!Sa!Ram 5/o 5omay Ram, Agea about 41 years, Asst. Teacher Prirnary School /*L,nnnn D-»i!-..!•+»..B '^iea+ • l/n-o-a. ^iiupuii^ ouiiSuii i [jul', L/ioi ° l\.ui i&u- ir fi i ••'-'•/ 5aTya Nsrayan Ram, S/o Shri Londe Ram, Aged a&out 67 years. i&overrimerit AAiddle School nAansuk Baikurstou"., Dist: Korea-(C.&.) Versus Respondents //;1. Sfate of Chhattrsqarh Tnrouah - The Education DeparTrr,er,t. D.K.S. Bhawa",, Raipur, r^j^+ • rs^:^..". .''/' ^i ^ L/131 • rSUlpUI-~^^.t-7.7 The Director, Public Instruction Departme-nt, Raipur- (C.6.) 3. DssTr-kt EducaTion Officer, District: Korgu-(t:.6.) Head Office - Balk'jntpur-CC.6.) .„<:: "OiK .-^ f2 i A / Dy. D!rector?fcducatior!! Dist; Korea-(C.6.) l.pnrl Dffirp !C*Li^ ^f f a EL>S^ talkunt.Dur-fC.S.) -<- PFTTTTnM 1 .iKinPD .ADTT/'I P ??<> ./' ??7 DP TUC v~v F^-L j r^jj-Ej-i^jM^-j'yi.^E-.f^'^r^i-'-^fc.L,^-*-^/ ^—£-f \»f\ af~!L, CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF SUITABLE WRIT, WRITS. DIRECTION ETC TO DO JUSTECE i.N TH'E XI-HC-78 ^IH^tl shHlth 3^T •<11<11<?11, BTfltf'ie, fs|dtyy< __ lAlf HrI^S/l&b ^[ 200 3TI^?Tq^^ (^df^sli^T) ari^T afn-f^rra; cWSTT^TOTR; ?^ITWHf?(T3n^T lexute petit|.one 1.9.2006 Mr. Anil Singh Rajput, Miss. Deepali Pandey, P.L. Heard. By fhis writ petition, direction agaiu.st the respoi) seuiori.tv fi-om. the date oftheirl order dated 4.8.2005 (Aimexufe passed iu coiaplian.ee of the on^ The case of fhe appointed as Assistaat Tei Departineut on probation for ^ ofRs.300/-. However, later on| the petitioaers were regulariz^d regiilar pay scale. Other sim4a the Higu Court of Madhya aiid fhe inatter ultituatelv de< No.135/2004 in favour of| coinpliaace of aforesaid orderj for payiuent of uicrement of| Teachers. The petitioners m.a4< same treatment as fhey are the respondents have not paic^ to file fhis writ petition. Leamed couasel for petitioners may be aUowed to No.2 to give similar trcatment| '=tii<itci<fl-] iniTcff ff fs^S <R|«I< ^3T)^>T3n^?r Adv^cate for the petitioner. |For the State on advance copy. [the petitioners have prayed for a |.dents to pay fhe iacreinent aad |mitial appointment ia the light of fhe P-2) aad also as per Aruiexure P-3 i|lers passed by fhis HonTale Court. :rs is that thev were initiaUy lichers in the School Education period of one year on the fixed pay after com.pletion of two years tenure but fhey are not beiag given the limUarlv situated teachers raoved befoie Prapesh, Jabalpltr for regldar pay scale |;ided m the year 2004 vide L.P.A. the Assistaat Teachers aad in aa order dated 4.8.2005 has been probation period to tiie Assistaat several representations to accord Iso similarly situated Teachers, but aiiy heed, fherefore, they are forced PraBesh the petitioners subiaits that the ^uake a representation to respondent to +he petitioners aad the sacae pay P.T.O. XI-HC-78 s^ •qraicw, g'€ is,Rtcii+fy tfTHOI Sb*ll<:h WT 200 3T1^T Tgg? (li<a(3=1^) an^TqirRFiN; (Wail^TsbKi'h <£ Roshaji 5TgTWHf?cT3t^T —Lj- ^t^ scale which has beeri sancti teachers on accouiit of thel coinpliance of the orier passe)! leamed couasel appeariag fo|i objection. Haviag heard leamed ct regard to the facts asid prayer laade by learaed coiuis just, fair aiid reasonable. opiaion on the laerit of case, rcpresentation along with cop^ respondent No.2 withui a perio|d their grievances and ia ti-ira, same in an objective laanner ->^ date of its receipt, after consif peiitioners and taking in.to Madhya Pradesh High Court present petitioners staud on fh^ L.P.A. No. 135/2004, then thej ciTC'ulm.staiices tlie Wifh flie direction afpress Parties are entifled for cei ttil'ilfcf'ill-f WRJy if fsS <[fl»l< ^STRra-an^T ioned to other siuularlv situated order Aanexure P-2 passed in 1 m L.P.A. No. 135/2004, to which fh.e State/ i-espondents has no ^uiisel for the parties aad havin^ of fhe case, the liiaited ;1 for tli.e petitioners appears to be T^herefore, without expressing any petitioners are allowed to ruake a of this petition and annexures to oiten days fi-oin today raisiag all respoudent No.2 shall decide tfae yifhin a period of 30 days fi-om the jlering all the points raised by fhe ^ccount fhe order passed by the ^n L.P.A. No. 135/2004, and if the sam.e footjng as fhe petitioners m. be also san.ctioned fhe same pay |id, the petitioii. stands disposed of. jtified copv ofthis oider. - -' ~ Sd/- L.C.Bhadoo Judge P.T.O. \<p.^ ^v^^.^