^ mGHCOURT OF CHHATTISGAmiAT BILASPUR S.R^ HQN'BLg MR. 8ATISH K. AGNIHOTM, J. WRIT PETITION (S) No. 1446 of2007. PETITIONER Purushottam Das Bsdiay, S/o Shri Bhagwan Das Buragi, Aged about 39 years, Assistant Teacfaer, Ooverammt Primary Sehool Barkuta, Distriet Korba(C.G.) RESPONDENTS VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgaih, Tfarough A® Secretary, Tribal Wel&re & Education Departmenl, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Commissioner, Tribal Wetfere Department, Raipur (C.G.) 3. The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Wel&re Departmeat, Koiba (C.O.) 4. The Block Education Offieer, Katghora, Distriet Korba (CXj.) Present: Shri Ahswani Shukla, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer for the State/resp<xidents. ORDER (Passed on 13m Mareh 2W7) 1. The petitioner was appointed on 19.01.1990 as Assistant Teacher <m a fixsd pay scale of Rs. 300/-. After completion of one years of probation, he was gmnted regular pay scale. 2. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submit that die issue involved in the case is asto whefher, tiie petitioner eatitted to < regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initiaJ appointmeator fiom the date of completion ofprobati<m period. 3. The issue mvolved, herdn was coasidered by tiie Madhya Pradesh State Admmistrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A. No. 2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 others Vs. State of M.P. & odiers), wherein it was held that the sunilariy situated teachers are entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment. The matter was taken-up to the Hon'ble Suprerae Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 6892/93. The said petition was disaiissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court upholding the decision ofthe Tribunal to the effect that Ifae Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitted to regular pay scale ifrom date ofinitial appointment. 4. Learned counsel appeariag for the petilionCT farther submits IhatIhis Court, while considering the saffle issue in Sushi! Tiwari & others Vs. State Govt. of Chhattisgarii & others (W.P. (8) No. 5976 of 2006) by order dated 7-11-2006, has graated regular pay scalew.e.f. the date ofinitial appointment. 5. Leamed counsel appeariag for the parties joiatly subaut that tfiis case is squarely covered by tfae decision ofthis Court in the case of Sushi! Tiwari & others Vs. State Govt. of Chhattisgath & olfaers (Supra). 6. In view ofthat, this petition is allowed in the saine tenas. No wder as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Aarit