le c ? 00 IN THE HON'BLB HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (W.P. (S) No. ......l?;^.^.r....../2011) PETITIONER Raincharan Patel S/o. Bishewar Prasad Patel; Aged about -51 year, R/o. Working as Assistant Teacher Government Primary School Pendra; <&e- ^^^€ ^^^ ',;y"\,.--1 ^l'^" Block Office - Pendra; District - Bilaspur (C.G.) •^ VERSUS RESPONDENDS State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Secretaiy School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) !. The District Education Officer, Bilaspur District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ?. The Block Education Officer, Pendra District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ^ 4. The Joint Director Office - Bilaspur District - Bilaspur (C.G.) WRITPETTTION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ i ^ :rfSS Ramcharan Patel State of C-hhattisgarh and others Shri Vineet Kumar petitioner. Pandey, counsel for the Shri . V C T.i-i-l f .c>. i hskur, Dy. A.G forthe State. (21.1S.2011) The petitioner was initiat!y appointed as Assistant Teacher on a fixed pay of Rs.150 and thereafter he was granted regular pay sca!e on completion of his probation period. 2. The question of law invotved herein is as to whether the petitioner is entitled to regular pay scale w.e.t'. the date of initial appointment or from the date of completlon of his probation period. 3. Learned counsei appearing for the petitioner as wel! as for the State jointly submit that the facts and .question of law involved in the present petition are the same as to that of in W.P.S. No.5876/2006 (Sushil Tiwari and others vs State Government of Chhattisgarh & others) which was allowed vsde order dated 07.11 .2006. 4. 'Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petltioner may be permitted to file representation before the CQmpet$nt authority and in turn the authority may be directed to declde the same in the iight of the above mentioned order psssed by this Court and the circular dated 12 December 2006 (Annexure P-5). [liHi^ i^;S^4E^X: |!";'T'"«i]^B°!sg;,{=<g --?-- Priya 5. Learned State counsel has no objection if the petitioner makes any such representation and the same is decided in accordance wlth law and the order passed by this Court and also in view ofthe circular (Annexure P-5). 6. In view ofthe above submission made bylearned counsel for the parties, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to make representation before the competent authority within three wee.ks from today and in the eventuality of making any such representation the same would be decided by the concerned authority after considering the entire facts of the case withln a period of four months thereafter. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the authority concerned would be at liberty to decide the representation strictly in accordance with law. - 1 pritu*CTDiwakar Judge W'l