BFI'eS-"'1 ,/- v-^ i '/ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (Sl No. 6^/6. OF 2009. w PETITIONER ^-s:'^- ^?1%---"" ;.^ ^ ^fsy^y' >y.^"..-"'' Kalyan Singh Gandarey, (earlier Joshi), S/o. Birsingh Gandarey, aged about 53 years, Head Master, Govt. Middle School Taraud, Block Balod, District Durg, (G. G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. State of CUhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C. G.) 2. District Education Officer, Durg, Distt. Durg (C. G.) 3. Block Education Officer, Balod, Distt. Durg, (C. G.) WMT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1 S^^l^ -i;^'; mOH COURT OF CHHATHSQARH AT BILASPUR PETTTIONER WMT PETITION (S) No. 6616 of2009 Kalyan Siagh Gandarey. RESPONDENTS State rfChhattisaaA & Othera. WKIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTH'UTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'Me Shri Satish K. AsnihQtri. J. Thakm Shri Manik Singh, Advocate tbr the petitionar. Shri A.V.ShridhsT, Panel Lawyer &r flie State/respondents. ORDER(ORAL) (Passed on I ltb day ofNovaaber, 2009) With the consent ofleamed eounsel appeariitg for the parties, the petition isheard fiaallv. 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner subnrits that the petiticmer was appointed initially on a fixed pay seale on probation. After eompletion of probation period, the petitioner was granted reeular pay scale. Leamed counsel further subtnits that the isaae involved in the case is asto whefcer the petitioner ia entitled to regular pay scale with effect from the date of nutial appwntment or after completion ofprobation period. 2. The issue involved hsrein was consideied bv tfae Madhva Piadesh State A-dministrative Tribunal, Jabalpur (for short "the SAT") in O.A.No.2745/89 (Madkiifcant Tadii cmd 56 others vs. State ofM.P. & others), whereia it was held that the similarly situated teachers are entitled to regular psy scale •w.e.f. the date ofinitial appointment. The matter was taken up to the Supreme Court. Tlie appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Coiirt, upholding die decision crfthe Tribunal to the effect that the Teachera/Assistant Teachers are entitled to resular pay seale fi-om date ofinitial appointment. 3. In view offhs above submissions made by leamed eounse! for the partiai, the writ petition is disposed ofin fhe same terms i.e., the petitionar is granted liberty to make a representation, if so advised, to consider the petitioner's ease oa its own merit and perspective, if the petitioner stands on the same footings as pe»order passed by the SA^ is.Meidhiskant Yadu (supra) and subsequentfy eonfinned by the Supreme Court in Speeial Lsave Petition (Civil) No. 6892/93 by order dated 3-1-1994 and grant reliefaccordingly. __^ [ 4. In view of foreaoins, the writ petition is disposed of. | Sd7- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge