.'..^i^ ,•• .'••* d >•?. ^:^^<^ s^^r^^'' ^ ,^- ^•- ^WKIE BILASPUR (C.Q. 5-^6^ /; Public Instructions 3. Distn'ct HSI ^ @ -1( TSf •<11<<ICl-4, •ciTilyiti, fs|clly^< ,LO.K&^'V^>- sh^in ^•••—••-••^••"••••••••-•——^ 3fI^T 'q^T (Ttc*('i°l<'Et) aii^fwi^N? (RI3|I^%lfe TOiiwaftgan^i SB : Hon'ble Shri Manindra Mohan IShrivastava. J. 30-09-2011 Shri K.S.Pawar, counsel for the betitioner. Shri N.Naha Roy, Panel Lawyer Learned coypsei appearing for the case is as to whether, the petitionri *l<lti-l4-t 11FR?[ if fe.;"i ^fegil ^? aifgif an^-i! for ihe State. With the consent of iearned coutisei for the parties, the matter is heard finaily. he petitioner submits that the issue invoived in is entitled to regular pay scaie wlth efrect from the date of initiai appointment or after dompietion of probation period. The issue involved herein wsjs considered by the Madhya Pradesh State |O.A.No.2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu anef 56 Iwherein, it was held that the similariy situated 1 Administrative Tribunai, Jabalpur in offiers v. State of M.P. & others), teachere are entitled to regular pa^ scale with effect from the date of initial appointment. it is not disputed by both the p^rties that the matter wss iaken up by the State to the Apex Court but the appeal was ^lso dismissed by the Apex Court upholding the decjs'ion of the Tribunal to the effect thjat the teachers / Assistant Teachers are entitied for reguiar pay scale from the date of tfieir initial appointment. Accordingly, the petitioner is g in turn, the concerned respondent is of receipt ofthe representation, subje<j In view offoregoing, this peh'tio^ is finally disposed of. anted liberty to make representation raising al his grievances, in the iight ofthe aforejsaid judgment and order dated 05/01/2011, and ^iirected to decide the representation, if any, in accordance with !aw, on its own merif^, vwthin a period of three morrths from the date It to verification of the facts. Deepti Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge