' Dinesh Kumar Dewangan, Age 59 ears S/e Shri Ba! Krishna Dewangan, Asst. Teacher, Govt. Primary Schboi, Shakti Nagar Camp-2 Bhilai, District Durg (CG Vrus 1 The State Y Government of Chhattisgarh, Threugh the Secretary, School Education Departmen Ministry, D.K.S. Bhawan aipu‘r, (C.G.) Director of Pubiic Instructions, State of Chhattisgarh, Pension Sada, Raipur (C.G.) The District Education Officer, Durg .(c.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 225 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF IND!A Appearance: Shri Somkant Verma. counsei for the petitioner. Shri Pa rdeep Sigh, n Panel Lawyer for the Stte a on avance d eopy. {222G9?) Heard. $UNIL KUMAR SINHA, J _ It Learned counsei for he petitioner submits that the issue invoived in the case is as to whether the petitioner is entitld to regular pay scale w.eif. the date of initial appointment or from the date of completion of probation period. He submits that the issue invoived herein was considered by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal; Jabalpur in (1A. No.2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 others Vs. State of MP. and others), wherein, it was heid that the similarly situated teachers are entitled to regular pay scaie w.e.f. the date of initial appointment. The matter was taken up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6892i93. The said petition was dismissed Wthe Hon’ble Supreme Court upholding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR WP. (S) No.7563 of 2007 y ) es PETiTlONER RESPONDENTS t . R ORAL ORDER &1 t e hers are entitied to regmar pay scaie from ihe rther submits that this Caurt, e issue in Ram Kumar S Teachers/Assistant Teac date of initial appointment. Learned counsel for the petitioner fu ahu and othei's Vs. whiie considering the sam other (\N.P.(S) No.813 of 2003 by of Chhatiisgarh and an State Govt. order dated 12.2200 y scale wed. the date of 7, has granted regular pa initial appointment. Learned counsel for the parties joi squarely covered by the decision of this Court in th ntly submits that this case is e case of Ram Kumar Sahu and another (supra). ln View of that, this petitio However, this order shatl be subject to ali \verificatio facts pleaded in the petition. n is allowed inthe same terms ns made by the M l l i l l State regarding Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge vatti