...,>• A ^yf^^' ^^:^8,^-- ^(O'-^•lu ^^^- ^.^""" (2) <^?,er^2^_ BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR W.P(S)NO. //^^of 2010 SiNQLE B! PETITIONER RESPONDENTS r Kirtanram Bakhare, S/o Late Shri Baliram Bakhare, aged about 54 years, Upper Division Teacher, Government Middle School, Patekohra, Block-Chhuriya, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS :1.' State ofChhattisgarh, Through : the Secretary, Department of School Education, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. ^District Education Officer, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 3. ^BIock Education Officer, Block- Chhuriya, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTIONOF INDIA. I--^, H8GH COURT OF CHHATTiSGARH : BILASPuR Sinaie Bench: non'bie Shri Manjndra Mohan Shrivastava, J. PETSTiONER RESPGNDENT3 WRJT PETiTtON (Si N0.4598/2010 Kirtanram Bakhare Versus State of Chhattlsgam and others VtfRiT PETITSON UNDER ARTiGLE 22S OF THE CONSiTUTSON_ORNDIn Present: - Shri Gautam Khetrapal, counsel for ths petstlonsr. SVIs. Smita Ghai, Panei Lawyerforthe State. ORAL (Passed on 18th ofAugust, 2010) The petitioner was initiaiiy appointed as Asslstant Teacher on a flxed pay of Rs.100/-. After compieuon of hls probauon period, he was graoted reguiar pay scale. 2. Learned counsel appearing fbr the petitloner submltted that the issue invoived in the case is as to whether the petitioner is entitted to regular pay scale vvith effect from the date of initlal appotntment or after completion of probation period. 3. The issue invoived herein was consldered by the ?viadnya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabaipur in OA.Ho.274&i6Q (Maurwhant Yadii and 56 Oth^rs v. State ofM.P. & oOTers),wherein itwas held that the simiiariy situated teachers are entitied to reguiar pay scale with effect from the date of initial appointment. The rnatter was teken up to the Hon'bie Supreme Court. The appeai was dEsmissed by the Hon'bie Supreme Court uphoiding the decision of the Tnbunai to the effect that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitied to reguiar pay scaie from the date or initiai appointment. 4. in view of the above stated submissions made by ieamed counsei for the parties, the writ petition is disposed off in the same terms i.e. the petitioner is granted iiberty to rnake representauon, ifso advlseu, to consicier his case, If he stand on the sarne footings as per order dated 24-08-1982 passed by the Madhya Pradesh State Auministrative Tribunai, JabaSpur in O.A.No.2745 of 89 fylauhukant Yauu fsupra) and subsequently confirmed by order dated 03-01-1934 passed by the Hon'bie Supreme Court in S.L.P.No.6o92/1993 anu grant reiief accordinsiy. 5. No order as to costs. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge Dsspii t- '•'