5‘ ‘ \ Hi€§-§ COURT GF CHHATT15$A§H AT EILI$5§9U§ $ingie $eraci’: : §€G§fb§a 55am $Lim§ iéumgr $iaiaa, .3". wrs? ¥e¢i¥§5n Naéaw af 2m? ?e?§‘§‘iener i 5ohcmiei Narmaéi agad 6g years sx'a T’nakakagn Narma§i, Assisfam Teacher Middie Schcoi, Somni Eisfricf Rajnanqdggaoa {CG} ; Vawus §espandem$ 1. The Smfe Gevammem of Ch ha??isgar-h , Tara rough The Secrefary, Sé%woi Educafhn Daparmen‘r Min isTry, D KS ghavan, Raipur (CG) t.‘ The Dis?ric? Edugafion Of‘f‘icar, Rqjnarsrigaan (5.19} Wrh" Pa?i+éon undgr Arfirsie 226 of fhe Consfi‘m‘rion of india ?r-esem' 2 Shri Somkan‘r V‘erma; counsel fer The pe‘rifioner. Ms Suni‘i‘a Jain, ?cme§ iawyer’ for ‘i’he Sfa‘m. §%£§3§§8 (Pwsw (3%: 95m Nwe‘mbw, EGG?) Heard. Learned counsei fer- é‘he pefifioner submH's 1*?m‘i' The issue invoived in The case is as To w§sefher ”the eef%fioner is era-Med ?c reguier pay smie wef. The daie of ini‘h‘al appoin‘rmen? or §rom The daTe of compietien of probed-ion period. He submits The? fhe issue invoived herein was considered by ‘ii‘ie Madhya Pradesh STm‘e Aeminisfrcrive Tribumi: Jubelpur in GA. Ne.2745/89 {Madhukenf Yadu ané 56 ofi'iers Vs. Sfe‘re of MP. iii O‘i‘hers), wherein, if was iieid fhcr‘r The simiiariy si‘ma‘red Teachers are emii'ied 1's reguier pay scaie wef. ‘i'iqe date of iniTiei aspainfmenr “rise morier was faker: up i‘o me Hon‘bée Supreme Cour‘i’ in Speciai Leave Pei‘irion {Civié} Ne. 68§2f93. The said peri'i’ion was sisrr‘aissed bv irie Han‘éaie Sunreme Cour? anheidim fhe decision ” of The Tribunai To The effecf Thaw The TeacherslAssisTanf Teachars a‘ra en?i?ied To reguiar pay scaie from fhe dafe 0f niféai appoinTmem. Learned counszi for ‘%'he pe?i‘rioner‘ fur'rher submi‘rs fha‘r friis Court whiie considering a‘he some issue in Ram Karma“ Sahu & Ofhers Vs. Sfm‘e Caovf. 0% Chhaffisgarh £9 anofher (W.P.($) No. 813 of 20G?) by order dafed 122.2€307’ has granfed‘reguiar pay scaie wef. Tha daTe of ini‘ml apgoén‘rmem. Learned counsei for fhe pari’ies joim§y submif T§1a$ fhis mse i$ squareiy covered by Tka decismn of This Cour“? in fhe case of Ram Kumar' 5am and mo‘r‘her‘ ($upm'). in View of That This peTiTion is aiiowed in TTae same Terms. However; This order s‘naH be suogecT To n§§ verH‘icaTions made by The SToTa regarding TacTs gaieaded in The paTiTion, Sd/— Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge i