d^/ao IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH W.P.(S) No. B^^ IZOQ^J- PETITIONER Ci.^Smt. Anand Kishori Tigga, W/o. Shri ..•• -<.^~' ^.-^'g^' Ajay Kumar Tigga, aged about 36 7^r&> ..•••*"' years, Assistant Teacher, Govt. Hr. R^^- •^""^•-^ '".^•^" ,£;°' Sec. School, Supela-Bhilai, Distt.- Durg (C.G.) -.tf ^ RESPONDENTS VERSUS 'rs*";;.?•;>/,-» ©^""""^?^ ',''^/ - '\ y^. yy "'x^?. ^fp.p^^'^v8! 'w^^^}^ State of Chhattisgrh, Through - The Secretary, Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Director, Public Instruction Department, Chhattisgarh Govt. Raipur District Education Officer Durg, Distt. - Durg (C.G.) Principal, Govt. Middle School, Supela- Bhilai, Distt. - Durg (C.G.), WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE ^26/227'OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA RES^Slt. CL^KtoA.G. Asm ^- -.^* f i iSuy-^^iASS-.L... \ HI6H COURT OF CHHATnSGMM AT BELASPUK W. P.(S) No. 855 of 2007 Petitioner Smt. Anond Kishori Tigga Versus ftespondents : State of Chhatt-isgarh cnd others SB: Hon'bfe Mr. Justice Satish K. Ayiihotri. J Present: Mr. Vipin Tiwari, Advocate for 1+ie petition6r. Mr. Satish Supta, &y. Govt. Advocate for the Stnte/respondents. OROER 0>oussed on tiiis 13th Day of F^bruary, 2007) 1. The petitioner was appointed vide order dated 1.6.93 (^nnexure P/l) as Assistant Teacher on fixed pay scale of Rs. 6(X)/-. After comptetion of two years probation, dw vws grwited regutar puy scote of 120)/-. 2. Leamed counsel appearing for •the petitioner aibmits that •the isaje mvotved in ttie case is asto whether the petitioner fe entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment or after completion of probation period. 3. The isaie involved, herein wns considered by "fhe Madhya F>roctesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A. No. 2745/89 (AAadhukant Yadu and 56 o'thers Vs. State of M.P. & o'thers), drfwrein it was held that the simihrly si-hiated teachers are entitled to regufcr puy scate w.e.f. -the date of initial oppointm»it. The matfer wdS •h»ken-up to the Hon'ble &jpreme Court-. The appeal was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court upholding the decisionof . 'tXtdS.:^^ 2> ,'JI. •ttie Tribunal to the effecl' •rttat -the Teachers/Assistdnt Teachers are entitled to reguhr pay scafe from cbte of mitial appointment. 4. Laimed counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits •riiat this Gourt', while considering -the same issue in Amar Sai Ram & others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh A o-thers (W.P. (5) No. 4725/2006} by order dated 1.9.2006, has gronted regular pay scale w.e.f. The date of initial appointment. 5. Leamed counse| appearing for the parties jointly submit that •this case is squarely covered by •the decision of this Court- in the case of Amar Sai Ram A others Vs. State of Chhatl'isgarh & others (5upra). Babfu 6. ln view of that, this petition is diqiosed of in the same terms. No orcler cs to costs. Sd/- Satish K.AgnihotTi Judge