HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR WJ*. 181 Ho.74ie of_a03? PETITIOMER RESPOITOBNTS Smt. Mangte Khadjlkar, D/o Shrj Aaaat Narayani Khadfflcar, aged about 54 years; Assistant Teachcr Govenuaent Boys Primaiy School Dayalband, Bilaspur, Block BiBia, District Bi3aspur(CG) Versus 1 State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretaiy, School Education Department, D.K.S, Bhawaa, Raipttr (C.G.) 8 The Director, Piablic Instructk>ti Department Raip'ur(CG) 3 District Education Officer, Bilaspur (CG) 4 Block Education Officer, Bilha, District Bflaspur (CG) 5 Joiat Director, Treasuiy, Bilaspiir (CQ) WRIT PBTI'nOB UMDER AR-nCXE 836 OP THE COIISTITUTIOW OFIKDIA Appearance: Shri K.S.Pawar, Connsel for the petitioner. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Panel Lawycr for the State on advance copy. QRALOjBDER (13.12.2007) 8UKIL KUMAR SINHA. J Heard. I^eamed counsel for the petitioner'!'suhmits that the issue involved in tlie casc is as to whether the pctitioner is cntitled to rcgiilar pay scalc w.e.f. fhe date ofinitja} appomtment or from the date ofcomptetion ofprobation pcriod. He. siibmits that the issue mvolved herein was coTisidered by the Madhya Pradesb State Adinmistrative Tribuiial, JabalpuT m O.A. No.3745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 others Vs. State of M.P. and ofhers), wherein, it was held that fhe similarly situatert tcachers are entifled to rcgular pay scate w.e.f. fhe date of initia) appointaient. The matterwas taken up to fhe Hon'ble Supn'mc Court in Special 2. WP(S) 7416/2007 •^ Leave Petition (Civi1) No.6892/93. The said petitioTi was dismiissed by ttae Hon'bte SupTeme Coiirt iiphoMteg tlic decisjon of the Trihunal to the effect that the Teachers/AssistaTtt Teachers are entitled to rBgiilar pay sca1e froin the rtatc of initial appoinfcmcnt. I^eamed counsel for the petitioner furfher submits fliat tliis Court, while considering tTie same issue in Ram Kuitiar Sahu and others Vs. State Govt. of Chhatttsgarh aTid another (W.P.(S) No.813 of 2007) by orier dated 12.2.2007, has granted rEgiilar pay sca1e w.e.f. the date ofinitial appomtmcnt. Leamed counsel for the parfies jointly subtnits that this case is squarely covered by tlie decision of this Cozirt in tlie case of Rain Kiunar Sahu aud another (supra). In view ofthat, ttus petition is allowed in tlie aaine terms. However, th.is order shall be siibject to all verifiications inade by fhe State regarding facts pleaded in tlie pRtition. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge vatti