HIGH COURT OF CHHATTlSGARi-i, $§LA$PUR WP. is: No.756"? of 20W? Smt. Nirmaia Jha We Late Shri YZK. ‘viha Age about 57 years, 'Assit. Teacher‘ Rio Sonpur Road, PETITIONER Narayanpur Distt.- Narayanpu‘r (C.G.) Versus RESPONDENTS 1 State Government of Chhattisgarh Through:— Secretary, Tribal & Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, (C.G.) 2 District Education Officer Distt.- Narayanpur (C.G.) WRIT PETlTiON UNDER ARTICLE. 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF iNDiA Aggearance: Shri Somkant Verma, counsei for the petitioner. Shri Pradeep Singh, Panei Lawyer for the State on advance copy. GRAL'oRoER {20.1 229$?) sum. KUMAR srNHA. J Heard. Learned counsel 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 from the date of completion of probation period. He— submits that the issue involved herein was considered by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunalp Jabaipur in O.A. No.2745i89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 others Vs. State of , MP. and others), wherein, it Was held that the 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‘bie Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6892i93. The said petition was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court upholding the decision of the “Tribunal to the effect that the TeachersiAssistant Teachers are entitled to regular pay scale from the date of initial appointment. . Leamed counsel for the petitioner further submits that this Court, while considering the same issue in Ram Kumar Sahu and others Vs. WP(_S) No.7567/2oo7 State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and another {VVP.(S) No.813 of 2007) by order dated 12.2.2007, has granted regular pay sca initial appointment. Learned coun ‘e w.e.f. the date of eis Ram Kumar sei for t‘ne parties jointiy submits that this cas squarely covered by the decision of this Co‘urt in the case of Sahu and another (aupra). be subject to ail verifications made by the State regarding facts pieaded in the petition. Sdl- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge e same terms. In View of that, this petition is allowed in th However, this order shaii i l l l l l l l i l