HIGH CQURTOF CHHAmSGARH, BILASPUR Writ PetitLon LSLNo^ 1737/2009 PETITIONER RESPONDENT Jeevan Lal Sharma, aged about 55 years, Assistant Teacher, S/o Shri Gaya Prasad Sharma, R/o Ramsagarpara, Bhatapara, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G). Versus 1 State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan,,Raipur (C.G). 2 District Education Officer, Baloda Bazar, Distt. Raipur (C.G). 3 Block Education Officer, Bhatapara, Distt. Raipur (C.G) Block WRIT PFTITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Ap_pearance^ Shri Somkant Verma, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Arvind Dubey, Panel Lawyer, for the State/ Respondents on advance copy. ORAL QRDER {02.04.20091 SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. Heard. The petitioner was appointed on 10.12.1978 as Deputy Teacher on fixed pay scale of Rs. 100/-. After completion of probation, he was granted regular pay scale w.e.f. 05.7.1982 respectively. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the case is as to whether the petitioner is entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment or after completion ofprobation period. The issue involved herein was considered by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A.No.2445/89 (Madhukant Tadu and 56 others Vs. State of M.P. & others) '"»s BS, l;s»... ^ W.PrS)No. 1737/2009 wherein it was held that similarly situated teachers are entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment. The matter was taken up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The appeal was dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court upholding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitled to regular pay scale from the date of initial appointment. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits that this Court while considering the same issue in Ram Kumar Sahu and others Vs. State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and another in W.P.(S).No. 813/2007 by order dated 12.02.2007 has granted regular pay scale w.e.f. the date ofinitial appointment. Learned counsel appearing for the parties jointly submit that this case is squarely covered by the decision ofthis Court in the case of Ram Kumar Sahu and others Vs. State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and another (Supra) and it may be disposed of in terms of the order passed in the said case. In that view of the matter, this petition is allowed in terms of the order passed in W.P(S).No.813/2007. However, the State is at liberty to verify the facts pleaded in the writ petition. ../l-————" No order as to costs. --- SunilKumarsintla Judge