^ tiGH COURT OF CHHATTJSGARH AT BiLASPUR Wfiit Pstifen (S) No. 1398 of 2008 PeSitionsre 1. 3. fi .^ Versus Respondents 1. 2. 3. Ashok Kumar Yadu, S/o Shri Goku! Ram Yadu, Age about 45 years, Asstt. Teachsr, B.R.C. Bhatapara, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) Jeyan Lat Mali, S/o Shri Khorbahara Ram Maii,^Age about 45 years, Asstt. Teacher, Govt. Primary School, Kamta, Btock- Sirriga, Distt. - Raipur (C.G.) Tika Lai Tandan, S/o Shri Funit Ram Tandan, Age about 46 years, Asstt. Teacher, Sankul Kendra, GovS. Pri. School, Navagaon, Block- Simga, Dlstt.- Raipur (C.G.) Ganesh Ram Sen, S/'o Shri Nanhu Lai Sen, Age about 46 years, Asstt. Teacher, Govt. Primar/ Schooi, Kachloun, Block- Simga, Distt.- Raipur (C.Q.) Ramnarayan Sahu, S/o Shri Jhumuk Lal, Age about 45 years, Asstt. Teacher, Govt. Hr. Sec. School, Simga, Block- Simga, Distt.-Raipur (C.G.) Purusottam Prasad Sharma, 5/o Shri Kalanath Sharma, Age about 47 years, Asstt. Teacher, Govt. Primary Schooi, Suma, BSock- Bhatapara, Dtett.- Rsipur (C.G.) Ratiram Jagat, S/o Shri Sad Ram Jagat, Age about 47 years i! n T \J.U. i , Govt. Hr. Sec. Schooi, Baya, Biock- Kasdol, Distt.- Ralpur (C.G.) Shivprasad Mangiam, S/o Shri Dharamdas Manglam, Age about 48 years, Asstt. Teafcher, Govt. Primary School, Parasvani, Biock- Bhatapara, Distt.-Raipur(C.G.) Umeram Sahu, S/o Shri Mansha Ram Sahu, Age about 46 years, Asstt. Teacher, Govt. Middte School, Gordi, Slock- Simga, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) State Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Through: Secretary, Education & Tribal Department, D.K.5. Bhawan, Raipur, (C.G.) The District Education Officer, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) "^!—rTrn;'i- 11 a^-o 1-. WR!T PETITOIN UNDER ARTICLE 228 OF THE CONSTiTUTiON OF INDiA SJngte Bench : Hon'bie Mr. Satish K. AgnihotTi, J. Shri Som Somkant Verma, Advocate for the petitioners, Smt. Smifta Ghai, Panei Lav/yerfor the respondent Thakur 3. 4. ORALORDER irt (Passed On tnis 3" day of Mareh, 2008) The petitioners v/ere appointed initially, on a fixed pay of Rs. 169/-. The peSitioners v/ere thereafter, granted reguiar pay scale on completion of theprobation period. The question of !aw involved herein is, asto whether She petitioners are entitled to regular pay scate w.e.f. the date of initiai appointment or from the date ofcompSetion of probatlon period. Learnsd counsel appearing for the petitiGners, as we!i as leamed counsei appearing for She respondents/State, jointly submit that the facte and question of iaw, invoived in the present 'iwit pstition, are the same asto ttiat of in W.P. No. 1463/2006 ( Aeman Jain Vs. The State Government of Chhaffisgarh and another), v/hich was disposed of vide order dated 10.11.2(x36. in vie'ff of the above-stated submisslons made by learned counse! appearing for the parties, Ihe v;nt petition is disposed of in the same terms i.e. petitioner is entMed for regutar pay sca!e v/.e.f. the date of Initiai appointment, subject to verification ofthe fads. No order asto costs. —<3_ Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge