£'"--<-. <^' /- ) <T& 2^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (S)No. 8'"?^ /2007(S.B.) PETITIONER : ^ ^y'/ ^) .y^y/ ^M^ ^.;''\A..r y <^>-" Kushuwa Prasad Sidar S/o Shri Bhogilal Sidar Aged about 44 years, Asst. Teacher, R/o Village -Kandola Post- Bonda Via- Sariya, Tah.- Sarangarh, Dist: Raigarh-(C.G.) ^ ^•' VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. ^ ^- State of Chhattisgarh Through : Secretary School Education Departiaent, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) District Education Officer Raigarh, Dist : Raigarh-(C.G.) Block Education Officer Block - Raigarh District - Raigarh (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE^226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^^> / 3. HISH COURT OF CHHATTISSARH AT BILASPUR W. P(S) No. 890 of 2007 Petitioner Kushuwa Prasad Sidar Versus s : State ofChhafl-isgarh end o+hers SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri, J Present: Mr. Vineet Kumar Pandey, Advocate for- the petitioner. Mr. Sushil bubey, 6ovt. Adyocate for the State/ s. OR D E R (Passed on this 14th bay of February, 2007) 1. The petitioner was oppointed on 21.9.1982 ds Assistant Teacher oh fixed poy scale of Rs. 150/-. After completion of two year probation, he was granted reguhr pay scale of Rs. 169-300/-. 2. Leamed counse! appearing for the petitioner submits •that the issue invoived in the case is asto whether, the petitioner is entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment or after completion of probation period. 3. The issue involved, herein was considered by the Madhya Prodesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabaipur in O.A. No. 2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 others Vs. State of M.P. & others), wherein it was held that the similarly situated teachers are entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initia! oppointment. The matter was taken-up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special 7 L Leave Petition (Civil) No. 6892/93. The said petition was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court upholding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that ttie Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitied to regular pay scale from date of initial appointment. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits that this Court, while considering +he same issue in Aeman Jain vs. The State Sovernment of Chhattisgarh & cuiother (W. P. No. 1463/2006) by order dated 10.11.2006, has granted regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial oppointment. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the parties jointly submit that this case is squarelycovered by the decision of 1+iis Court in the case of Aeman Jain vs. The State Sovernment of Chhatt-isgarh & another (Supra). 6. In view of that, this petition is allowed in the same terms. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Subhssh