x ‘ F g @ h Q[o% PETITIONER Govardhan Singh Sarose, 8/0 Shri Khemnath Sa'mse, aged about 54 yeam, Upper Division Taacher. Gavemment Higher Secondary Schooi, Ranjna, Block Korbau District, Korba (CG). HIGH CDURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W’rit Petition gS) No. 2899 91'2008 VERSUS pd go Raipur (CG). 3. Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Department Korba (CG). 4. Block Education Officer, Korba, District Korba (CG). (WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) RESPONDENTS : . State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretaly, School Education Department DKS Bhawan. Raipur (CG). The Commissioner Tribal & Welfare Department SB: Hon'ble Mr. Satish K. A ‘ mtri J‘) Present : Shri Kunal Das, Advocate, appears on behaifof Shri KS. Pawar, Miss Sunita Jain, Panol Lawyer for the Stag/respondents. Advocate for the peti1ioner. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 18 day ofJime, 2068) With ‘the consent of, the parties, the matter is taken up for heating finally. . The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher on fixed pay of Rs. 150/-. Atter completion of two years of probation period; he was granted regular pay scale of Rs. l69~300/—. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the case is asto whether, the petitioner is entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date initial appointment or aher eompletion of probation peiiod. 2. The issue involved, herein was considered by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tiibunal, Jabalpnr in (1A. No. 2745/89 (Madhukant iYadu and ’56 others Vs. State of MP. & otlieis), wherein it was held that the similarly situated teachers are entitled to regular pay scale y v a Jb W.e.f. the date of initial appainfmem The matter was taken up to Hon'ble Supreme Court m Specxal eave Petmon (Cm!) NO 6892/93 The sa1d petltlon was d1sm1ssed by the Hon'ble Supreme Count upholdmg the demsmn of the Tnbunal to the effect that the Teachers/Assmtant Teachers are entxtled to regular pay scale hem date of initial appointment. . In View of the above stated submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the writ petitioh is disposed of in the s.me terms Le. the petitioner is gi'anted liberty to make a Ienresentation, if so adv1sed to consider his ease, if he stands on the same footings as per order dated 24.08.1992 by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpui', in 0A. No. 2745 of 89 Madhukant Yadu i(supra) and subsequently confirmed by order dated 03.01.1994 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 6892/93 and grant relief accordingly. . In view of the foregoing, this petition is disposed of. No order asto costs, Satish K. Agnihotri 'Judge Sd/—