HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 4085 of 2008 PETITIQNER : Chote Lal Tiwari aged about 56 years son of late Shri Brijmohan Tiwari, . Resident of I.E.M. School, Jhagrakliand, District Korea (CG). VERS'US RESPONDENTS : 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Secretaty, Department of School Education, Mantralaya, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CG). 2. The District Education Officer, Korea, District Korea 3. Administrator/Prmcipal I.E.M. School, Jhagrakhand, District Korea (CG). 4. The Director, Directorate, Public Institiition, Pension Bada, Raipur (CG). (WKH PETITION LT-NDER AR'HCLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) fSB: Hon'ble Mr. Satish K. Asnihotri, J.) Present : Shri R.K. Jaiswal, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Sunita Jain, Panei Lavv-yer for the State. ORALQRDER (Passed on 29t!l day ofJuiy, 2008) 1. With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for hearing finallv. 2. The petitioner claims to be an Assistant Teacher, working in I.E.M. School, Jhagrakhand, District Korea (CG), run and managed by the respondent No. 3. The petitioner without giving details as to vvhat is the natare of the School, why the teachers are at par with other teachers, has filed this petition, praying that the respondents be directed to grant benefits of5Pay Commission vv.e.f. 01.01.1996. 3. Be that as it may, it is diificult to decide the issue involved for want of adequate materials with regard to grant of 5 Pay Commission to the employees. Sahu This Court has aiready considered and decided the sanie issue on (^ 06.02.2007 in the matter of A. Lall (Smt.) Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others1 (W.P. No. 4108 of2005) and other connected matters. 5. It is not necessary to approach this Court directly when the law on a particular issue has already been settled. The petitioner may make a representation to the concemed authorities, if so advised, in the light of law settled by this Court in the matter of A. Lall (Smt) Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others (Supra). 6. This petition is accordingly disposed of with the above stated libert^'. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge 11 ' 2007 (1) BLJ 265