^ ^ \1^' HtGH COUm OF CHHATTISGARH, BjLASPUR PETiTIQNER RESPONDENTS W.P. fS)No.744Q of 2007 1. Bisahu Prasad Pandey, s/b Late Shri Dwarika Prasad Pandey, age about 58 years, UDT, Govt. Hr. Sec. Schooj, Kawardha District Kabirdham(CG) 2. Ramchand Lanjhi s/o Late Shri Jivrakhan Lanjhi, Age about 53 years, Head iyiaster, Govt. Primary Schooi, Amaltdih, Block Kawardha, District Kabirdham(CG) Versus 1 State Government of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretsry, Tribal & Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2 District Education Officer, Kabirdham, District Karibdham (C.G.) WglT PETITION UNDERARTiCLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF IND!A Appearance: Shri Ajay Shrivastava, Counsel for the petitioners. Shri Sumit Verma, Panel Lawyer for the State on advance copy. ORALQRDER (17.12.2007) SUNIL KUMAR S1NHA. J Heard. Learned counset for the petitioners submits that the issue invoived in the case is as to whether the petitioners are entitied to regular pay scaie w.e.f. the date of initial appointment or from the date of completion of probation period. He submits that the issue involved herein was considered by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabaipur in O.A. No.2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 others Vs. State of M.P. and others), wherein, it was heid that the similariy 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 Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civii) No.6892/93. The said petition was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court upholding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitied to reguiar pay scale from the date of initial appointment. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that this Court, while considering the same issue in Ram Kumar Sahu and others Vs. State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and another (W.P.(S) No.813 of Sunita WP(S) 7440/2007 2007) byorder dated 12.2.2007, has granted regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment. Learned counse! for the parties jointly submits that this case is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Ram Kumar Sahu and another (supra). In view of that, this petition is allowed in the same terms. However, this order shall be subject to all verifications made by the State regarding facts pleaded in the petition. Sdl-, «rt1S»fllarE SSBy"jttdge