1) 2) 3) Respondents Bhagwat Prasad Gabel, Slo. Shri Sagar Singh Gabei, aged about 56 years, Assistant Teacher, Government Primary SchooL Thakurdiya, Block Kharsia, District Raigam (CG). Gujrat Singh Rathiya, Slo. Shri Joidha Singh Rathiya, aged about 5B years, Assistant Teacher, Govemment Middle School, Barra, Block Kharsia, District Raigarh(OG). Smt. Chamarain bai Darsha, wlo. Shri Devi Ram Darshan, aged about 54 years, Assistant Teacher, Nootan Giris Primary Schooi, Hamaipara, Block Kharsia, Dislricl Raigam (CG). Versus 1) 2) 3) HIGH couRT OF cHHAmseARH: BILASPUR writ Petition (s) No. 2893 otzooa State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Ralpur (CG).. District Education Ofhcer, Raigarh (CG). Assistant Commissioner, Tribal 8. Welfare Department, Raigarh (0G). Block Education Ofhcer, Kharsia, District 4) Raigarn (CG). (Writ Petition under Article 2261227 of the Constitution of indie.) SB: 'Hon’bie Mr. Sa§sh 'K. Agnihotrl, J. Shri Anii Mourya, counseiforthe petitioners. Pl’esent; Shri Yashwant'Singh Thakur, Deputy Advocate General with Smi. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer for the State. VWth consent of ieamed counsel appearing for the parties, the mater is heard hnaiiy. 2) Leamecl counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were appointed as Assistant Teachers in 1973 on a fixed pay scaie of Rs'IOOI- for a period of two years. Atter completion of two years probation, the petitioners were granted regular pay scale. He further submits that the issue involvedfin the ORAL ORDER (Passed on 16‘“ day of June, 2008) case is asto whether the petitioners are entitled to reguiar pay scaie with effect from the date of initiai appomtment or after compietion of probation period. _ 3) The issue involved herein was considered by the Madhya Pradesh State i Administrative Tribunai, Jabaipur in O.ANo.2745/89 ( Madhukant Yadu and 56 others Vs State of M.P. & others), wherein it was heid that the similariy situated teachers are entitled to regular pay scale wet. the date of initial appointment. The matter was taken up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The appeal‘was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, upholding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the TeachersIAssistant Teachers are entitled to regular pay scate from date of initial appointment. 4) ln view of the above stated submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of in the same terms i.e., the petitioners are granted liberty to make a representation, if so advised, to consider the petitioners’ case, if they stand on the same footings as per order dated 248-1 992 by the, Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabaipur, in O.A.No. 2745 of 89 (Madhukaht Yadu (supra) and subsequently confirmed by order dated 3-1 ‘1 9947 passed by the Hon’bie Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 6892/93 and grant relief accordingiy. 5) .ln view of foregoing, the petition is disposed of, No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri " Judge ,e Raju