BEFORE THE HON' 1E HIGH COUE‘T OFJUDICATURE AT BILASPUMCm ) w.P. é6 /200 / w @ mvr Suresh Kumavr Sahu s/c Shri Brijlal Sahu n aged 39 years. Assigtant Teacher, Gov-t.G1r1s J Primary School Kusmi, Black Berla. Eaucatien District-Eemetara.(Disab1ed person). rmament resident oi - village Madipat Post Kmrsuni via Arjunda,131stt.mxg (c.G.). Versu Secretary. Department oi Schcol Education, sate Government otx Chbattisgarh D.K.S.Bhawan, MIPUR. D15tr1c~t Education Officer. Bemetara; Bisttv. mrg (C.G. ). Black Education Officer, Ber-1a,, matt. was (mm). Writ: petition under Article 226227 oy’the constitution 0f mdiao / / 4’ L J a “V s . t / HlGIk COURT OF CHHATTISGARII AT BILASPUR W. P. No. 166 0f2003 Petitioner : Suresh Kumar Sahu I Versus Respondents : The Stats Govt. of Chhattisgarh 85 othets Singe Bench: Hon’blc Mr. Justice Sathh K. Apihotri. Shxi Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate for the Petitioner. Miss Deepali Pandey, Panel lawyer for the Stam/ respondems. 0 R D E R (29'1‘ Navember, 2006) 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submhq that the peh'tioner has tiled an afiidavit dated 27.11.2006, staiing that the petitioner is not pressing any other 1e1ief, except the giant of mgular pay scale W.e.f. the initial appointment dated 28.6.1986. Thus, in this petition only the issue, asto Whether the petitioner is entitled to Nthe grant of regular pay scale horn the initial date of appointment i.e. 28.6. 1986, is being considered. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher vide order dated 28.6.1986 (Annexure P/ 1), wheiein it was provided that the petitioner would be granted pay scale of Rs. 545-925l- after a period of one year. It was further pmvided that the pen‘iioner would be entitled to the hxed pay of Rs. 300/- for a period of one year. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that similarly s‘miated employees who were initially granted a fixed pay of Rs. 300] - for a period of one year and after completion of two years perbd they were granted of Rs. 545-925I- had approached the Madhya Pradesh State Administrah've Tribunal. The Tribunal passed the Q? order on 24.8.1992 in O.A.No. 2745 of 1989 (Madhuknnt Yadu and 56 others Vs. State of M.P. & others). Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered hy the otder dated 7th Novemher, 2006, passed by this Court in Writ Petition (S) No. 5976/ 2006 (Sushjl Tiwan' 8r. others Vs. State Govt. of Chhattisgarh 8s others). Copy of the order is taken on xecord. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents/State does not dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of in terms of the order dated 7th November, 2006 passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 5976 of 2006. sci/— / /‘ v: Satish K. Agni-ham Judge t i’ Thakur J