£^l^2-^ IN THE HON»BLBHIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (Sl NoA^-te /2010 PETITIONER: Ayodhya Prasad Patel S/o Jet Ram Patel aged about 55 years, Upper Division Teacher Govt, Higher Secondary School, Koda Tarai Block- Raigarh Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS .^i ^ RESPONDENTS: ^" sfK^ ^••y^ ./'y'^ ^./' y,J- (';•,.' ^1'' 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through: - Secretary, Department ofEducation Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, (C.G.) 2." The District Education Officer, District Raigarh (C.G.) 3. The Block Education Officer Block Raigarh District Raigarh (C.G.) WRIT UNDER ARTICLE 226 OFLTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HiGn COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BiLASPUR Sjnaie Bench; Hon'bie Shri manlndra rvlQhan Shrlvastava, J. PETITSONER RcSPuNDcNTS WRiTPETiTiOhi(SlNG.427G/201u Ayodhya Prasad Patei Versus State of Chhattisgarh and others WKULpErmGN UNDER ARTiCLE 228 OF TnE CONSiT_yTiOp[OFiNDLA • • Present: - Shrl Anli Mourya, eounsel for the petitlonQr. ivis. Sangeeta Mishra, Panei Lawyer for the State. G'RAL (Passed on 9ih of August, 2010) Wlth the consent ofthe parties, the matter is iaken up for hearing fjnaiiy. 1. The petitjoner was appointed as Assistant Teacher on a fixed pay of Rs.100/-. After compietion of his probation period, he was granted regular pay scaleof 188-300/-. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue jnvoived in the case is as to whether, the petjtioner Is entltled to reyular pay scaie with effect from the date of initlai appointment or after conipjetion of probation period. 3. The issue involved herein was considered by the Iviadhya Pradesh State Adminjstratlve TribunaJ, Jabalpur In O.A.No.2745/88 (wladhukant Yadu and 56 others v. State of M.P. & others), wherein it was held that the similarly situated teachers are entitled to reguiar pay sca!e vvith effect ftom tne uate of iniual appointment. The matter 'was taken up to the Hon'bie Supreme Cou?1: in Speciai ^^^'^ .,..<src^%.i:\ j '^ ^^^'^ "^^^'y' Leave Petltion (Civii) No.6892/93. The said peution was ulsmlssed by the Hon'bie Supreme Court uphoiding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitied to regular pay scaie from the date of inltiaj appoinfment. 4. Learned counsei appearing for the petltioner funher submits that this Court, vvhiie considering the sarne issue in /\nmr Sai Rarn & Oihe^ v. State of Chhanisgam & Oti-seis (W.P.(S) No.4725/2006) by ordei- dated 01/OS/200S, ailowed the peutioners to make a representation within a period of ten days, ralsing aii their grievances. 5. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted llbetty to make representation ra.jsing als his grievance in the iight of the aforesaid judgment and the drcuiar dated 13/01/2003 (Annexure P/2) anu in tum, the concemed respondent Is uiiected to declde the representatlon, i? any, In accordance wlth iaw, on •Its own merits, within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of the representation, su&ject to v'erlfication of the facts. 6. in view of the foregoing, this petiuon is disposed OTL No order as to costs. Sd7- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge