% y^. <s HIGH COUKT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR W.P. (S) Ho. 7411 of 3007 PBTITIOWER RESPONDEKT8 a 3 4 5 Sint. Dui^esh Nandani @ Snit. Durgesh Nandiui AIuned, W/o Giilam Ahmcd, aged about 49 years, Assistaat Teacher Govenament Primaiy School Tilafenagar - B, Bilaspiir, Block - Bilha, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) Versus State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretaiy, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Director, Piiblic Tnstniction Department Raipur (CG) District Education Officer, Bilaspur (CG) Block Education OfRcer, Bflha, Distnct - Bilaspiu- (CG) Joiat Director, Treasuiy, Bilaspui(CG) WRIT PETITION UIIDER ARTICLE 326 OF THE C»MSTITUTION aFIlSDlA Apitearance: Stari K.S.Pawar, Counsel forthe petitioner. Shri Sumit Verma, Panel Lawyer for the State on advancc copy. ORAL ORDER (13.12.2007) 8UMIL KUMAR 8INHA, J Heard. I-.eamed counsel fbr ttie petitioiier siibmits that the issue involved in the case is as to whetlier the petitioner is entitlerl to regular pay scale w.e.f tlie date ofinitial appointment or Irom the ^ date of conapletion of probation period. Hc snbinits that the issiie invoTved hereiTi was considered by the Madhya Pradesh State Adiamisti-ative Tn'bunal, Jabalpur m O.A. No.'2745/sq (Madhukant Yadn and 56 othcrs Vs. State of M.P. and otlters), wlierein, it was held that the similarly sitiiated teachers are entitled to regiilar pay scale w.e.f. fhe date ofinitial appointment. The inatfer was taken up to the HonTile SuprRmc Coiirt in Special 2. WP(S) 7411/2007 '^°. Leave Petition (Cwil) No.6892/93. The said petition was disinissed hy the Hon'ble Supreine Court upholding the decision of ttie Tribunal to the effect. that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are enfitled to regiilar pay scale froin the date ofinitial appoinfcmeat. Leamed counse] for the pet-itioner farther su'bmits that this Court, while considering the same issue in Ratn Kumar Sahu and others Vs. State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and another (W.P.(S) No.813 of 2007) by oider dated 12.2.2(X)7, has granted regular pay scale w.e.f. the date ofinitial appointmeTit. Leamed counsel for the parties jointly subnuts that this case is squarely covered by flie decision of this Coiirt in the case ofRana Kumar Sa.hu and another (siipra). In view ofthat, ttus petition is altowed in the saine terms. However, this order shall be suhject to all verifications made by fhe State regariing facts pleaded in the pctition. Sd/- ; Sunil Kumar Sinha 1 Judge vatU