r~F \ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTiSGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) W.P. (S)No. 300>% of 2011 PETTTIONER : .\,/•%••' ^^/ <^./v^r ^^^y y^<y y<y RESPONDENTS Amrit Prasad Vishwakarma, S/o Late Shn' Baldev Ram, aged about 61 years, headmaster (middle school) at Govt. Middle School (T.W.D.) Jamgahana, Block Baikunthpur, t)istt. Korea (.C.6.) VERSUS ^ : 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through-The Secretary, Department of Tn'bal Welfare, Mantrallaya, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2. 'Assistant commissioner, Tn'bal Welfare, Department, Distt.- Korea (Baikunthpur) (C.6.) 3. Block Education Officer, Block Baikunthpur, &istt. Korea (C.6.) WRIT PETCTEON UN&BL^RTICLE^ 226/227 ^F THE CONSTn-UTCON OF INWA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRTT OR MANbAMUS/MRECTION OF OTHER APPtlOPRIATE WRIT. 01. PAKH.CULARS ABOUT THE PETITEONER : As mentioned above in the cause title. 11 sn^r q;i R-ijck ?T8TT 3?T^T S)^(N TST •^iiio'i, »ti1<H'is, fsidiyy IO.P.©)A-0.8C^& *<iM^r ai*ii<ft •^200 sn^T 'q^? (liclfl°i'iti) 'RniWlfeail^r SB : Hon'bie Shri Manindra Mollian Shrivastava. J 21-06-2011 Shri Somkant Verma, cou) for the petitioner. Shri N.Naha Roy, Panei L^w With the consent of iearneip finaiiy. The petitioner was successfully completing the pro| reguiarpayscale. Learned counsel appearirjg involved in the case is as to whe| scaie with effect from the date probation period. The issue invoived hereir) State Administrative Tribunal, Jafct and 56 ouiers v. State of M.f similariy situated teachers are the date of initiai appointment. Supreme Court in special Leave was dismissed by the Hon'bie Si|i Tribunal to the erfect that the reguiar pay scaie from the date of Learned counsei appearink Court, while considering the samj ^»i*il<n<ft*i Hrq^rf "4 fs^l <^(^T< ^? aiRn 3n^?r isei on behalf of Shri A.S. Rajput, counsel L^wyer for the State. counsel for the parties, the matter is heard appc|inted on a fixed pay of Rs.150/-.After |)ation period of 2 years, he was granted for the pstitioner submits that the issue ^ther, the petitioner is entitled to regular pay <tf initial appointment or after completion of was considered by the Madhya Pradesh jaipur in O.A.No.2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu P. & others), wherein, it was held fnat the ejititied to regular pay scaie with effect from The matter was taken up to the Hon'bie ipetition (Civii) No.6892/93. The said petition Ipreme Court. uohoiding the decision of the Tleachers/Assistant Teachers are entitled to initiai appointment. b for the petitioner further submits that this b issue in Amar Sai Ram & OVners v. State ;78 iTIE!'?! V, ^W 'a'srr 'ws aiWw ~3 T •<1NIC1<4, ®'al'M*IS,(s|<r!l<-l>j,< w-9^>)^- Q^ni 311^1 T!??T (' •B^iTWHfei sntn ofChhatasgarh & Omers [W.F.(S)| aliowed the petitioners to make a r| raising aii their grievances. Aocordingly, the petitioner is raising all his grievanoes, in the iight 27/12/2008, and in turn, the representation, irany, in accordancev] three months trom the date of receipt oTthefaGts. in view ofthe foregoing, this pe concenned ^aiferiN 'qiiRtf'? fest <r^i«cK ^sffin.sii^i 1 No.4725/2006] by order dated OT/09/2006, "ppreseniation witnin a penod OT ten days, jgranted iiberty io make a representation ijif the aforesaid judgment and oircular a'ated ijned respondent is directed to decide the «tnlaw, on rts own ments, wtthin a penod of jof the representation, subject to verifioation ition is disposed of. ^ C»A;'^S^ .^^ s^y^ I—'