mm ....................................-.......... .7...a zoo mafiaaném mamm (1mm) mm fs€rmrt %Wa1é¥l = jSingle Bench: Hon'ble Mr. J'us‘rice? Dhirendra Mishm) MNO 235/09 Pe‘ri‘l'ioner's Respondents ’ » Present: Mr. A.S. Rajpuf, Adv. for The pet Tioner‘s. Ms. Suni‘ra Jain, Panel Lawyer for The S’raTe. 23.01.2009 ' - Heard. By the- present petition tl to the respondent authorities ‘ petitioner from the date of his order dated 4.1.2007 passed byt (Pe’rifion U/A 226 oi‘ Constitution of India) Premcharan Gond, 5/0 Parmanand, Aged about 40 years, Assistant Teacher Government Primary School, Parsakhola, Block— Korba, Distt. Korba (6.6.) 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The l Secretary, Department of Tribal Welfare, 2. The Commissianer, Triba Chhattisgarh Government, 3. The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Depc rtment, Distt. Korba (CG) Vs D.K..‘S. Bhawan, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (CG). Welfare Depcrtment, Raip 1r (6.6). WWWW IFS/95 11/2008 1,00,000. e petitioner is seeking a direction 'o grant regular pay-scale to the initial appointment in the’Iight of his Court in W.P. (s) No.7323/06. l WWWW i7, / Case of The pe'rifioner is 1'haf he was appointed in The year 1993 as Assis’ram‘ Teacher on 1he fixed pay-scale of Rs.1200/‘. ‘Af‘rer compIeTion of probaficn period, The peTiTioher‘ was regularized buT he was noT given regular pay scale from The daTe of his iniTial appoinTmenT. OTher si ilarly siTuaTed Teachers aggrieved by The aforesaid acTion of T respondenTs, moved The STaTe AdminisTraTive Tribunal, Jabalpu for granT of regular pay-scale from The daTe of iniTial appoinT enT by way of O.A. No.1452/98_ (Harish Chand Singh and oThers s. STaTe of M.P. & oThers) and learned Tribunal vide order daTe 31.1.2000 allowed The same. This CourT also while considering The . (Khagesh PraTap Singh Knawar & Thers Vs. STaTe of 6,6. & oThers) vide order daTed 4.1.2007 direcT d The respondenT auThoriTies To . consider The case of The peTiTione s of ThaT peTiTion.Jihe peTiTioner herein also approached The respo denT auThoriTies To accord same TreaTmenT as he is also similarly s TuaTed buTiThe respondenTs have noT paid any heed. Learned counsel for The peTiTioner submiTs ThaT The peTiTioner may be allowed To ke a represenTaTion before : respondenT No.1 for giving similar TreaTmenT _To The peTiTioner and same pay-scale, which” has alre dy been sancTioned To oTher \ 1y; WWWW FS/95—11/2008—~1,oo,ooo. i \ h a m wt zoo . MWw (W) . W nma‘f ‘Fgz’tm mmm amt 2 L/ > a: aim mam W IF: zoo. .mm (W) WWW mm 'mmiWsq’tm mmm $Wm i / . ‘similar‘Iy sifu'a‘red» feachers on amounf of The order of ’rhe Sfafe ‘3 ‘Adminisfr‘a’rive Tribunal and This Court Learned for The SToTe has no objecTion if The’peTiTion is -v :gdisposed wjth a direction To The respondenTs To consider case of The peTiTioner. V In view of The above submissions of learned counsel for The parTie‘s, This peTiTion is disposed of wiTh IiberTy To The peTiTioner To make deTaiIed represenTaTion'aong wiTh cerTified copy of This order To respondenT No.1 raisin all his grievances, raised in This peT‘iTion, and on such represenT Tion being made, The reSpondenT {No.1 shall decideoThe same wiThin a period of eighT weeks from The J daTe of receipT of The represe ToTion, affer considering oil The poin‘Ts raised by The peTiTioner' a d Taking inTo accounT The orders passed by The STaTe AdminisTra'T ve Tribunal and ThiseourT and if The peTiTioner sTands on The sa efooTings, as The peTiTioners in W.P. (s) No.7323/06, Then The eTiTioner be also sancTioned The same pay—Scale. ’/ sd/— A i Dhirendra Mishra ‘ Judge —\ CerTified copy as per rules. 7.1, WWW’W—Fsbs—x 1 [zoos—1,00,000. //A ' m