^-^'- d^ 1 ^^_ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. (S|. No.S of 2009 PETITIONER ^.^€^^v <•<"•" ^..- <^Ravindra Kumar Sharaf, aged about 57 years, S/o Late Shri U^S'^' Kamalnayan Sharaf, Upper Division Teacher, Government Higher Secondary School, Barpali, Block-Kartala, District-Korba (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1.' State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) ^' 2. Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Korba, District-Korba (C.G.) 3. Block Education Officer Kartala, District-Korba (C.G.) 4. " Principal, Government Higher Secondary School, Barpali, Block-Kartala, District-Korba (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA IB^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No^460 of 2009 Petitioner Rawtndra Kuinar Sharaf Versus Respondent State of Chliattisgarh & others WRIT PETITON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotd J.) Shri K. S. Pawar, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri M. P. S. Bhatia, Deputy Govt. Advocate for the respondents. O RD E R (Orall (Passed on ttus 24*h day ofSeptember, 2009) Heard. 1. 2. 3. 4. Thalmr Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner subinits that by this petition, the petitioner is seekuig a direction to the respondents to graat him regular pay scale froiu fhe date of his initial appoiatmeut on the post of Assistaat Teacher. He further subinits that the identical issue has been decided by this Court in various writ petitions, one ofwhich is W.P.(S) No. 813/2007 (Ram Kuniar Sahu Vs. State ofChhattisgarh). Learaed counsel appeariag for the respondents/State subinits that if the petitioner raakes a representation to fhe concemed authority, fhe same inay be considered and decided ia fhe light of the judgnient and order passed by this Court in identical cases, after scrutiniziag the factual and legal position. It is ordered accorduigly. The petitioner raay niake a representatioa to the concemed authority along wifh a copy of this order, withia a period of three weeks froxu today, wtuch xaay be considered and decided wifhia a further period of four weeks fi-oia the date ofreceipt ofthe representation. In view of the foregouig, the writ petition staxids disposed of. No order asto costs. ,—--- ~ Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotn Judge