a Singia; mmh ‘gj‘c govia \ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH AT BILAsPUR w.P.L5) No. $13] / 20% Pners e’ri‘rio‘ 1. Har' Pmsad Kur‘r‘e, / 5/0 Lafe Heeralal Kur'r'e, Aged abouf 38 years, AsstTeacher GOVér-rwménf i>rimary School, Korbi, Sakul Kendra Rasofa, Block - Baiodo, Dis’r : Junjgir Champa-(C.E.) Raj Kumar‘ AnanT S/o Shri 3hanu Ram Anar‘f Aged abou‘r 38 years, Asst Teacher Governmenf Middle Schoof Navapara (B), Block -Baloda, Disf : Jam’gir Champa—(C.G.) Jugjivqn Lal Khare,~~ S/o Shr'i Dayomm Khare, Aged abouf 37 year‘s, A3312 Teacher Governmenf Middle 'School Jharve (Champa), Block ~ ‘ Bqloda, Dis? : Janjgir Champa-(C.6.) 4. Anup Kujur S/o Michan Kujur, Aged abouf 38 years, ASST. Teacher Governmen‘l‘ Middle School Jagm‘pur, Block I ~ Balkun’rpur, DisT : Korea—(CG) 5. Sudheer Ekka S/o Siril Ekka, ‘Aged abo‘u‘T 38 years, Asst Teacher Govt Primary school Bhakar, Block — Baikunfpur" DisT : Korea-(C.G.) i w (2) Versus RespondenTs :1. STaTe of Chha‘r’risgar‘h Through — The Educm‘ion Depam‘mem‘, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur‘, Dist : Raipur-(C.G.) 2. The Director, r Pubiic InsTr'ucfion Raipur— (6.6.) Department 3. DisTr'ic’r Educafion Officer; Dis’rricf : Korea-(6.6.) Head Office — Baikum‘pur-(C.6.) Dis’rricf Educu‘rion Officer, I Disf : Janjgir Champa-(C.G;) Dy. Dir‘ecTodEducaTiony’ DisT : Korea—(C.G.) I Head Office — Baikunfpur—(C.6.) 6. ’Dy. Direcfor' (Educa’rion) V Disf : Janjgir Champa-(C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 / 227 OF THE ONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OE SUITABLE ‘ O WRIT, WRITS DIRECTION ETC TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER. / , C go HIGH COURT OF CHHATT!SGARH AT B!LASPUR 3INGLE BENCH : HGN’ELE MR. SATI$H K. AGNIHOTR! J. WRIT PETmON 13.] NO.5191 OF 2005 Petitioners : Har Prasad Kurre and others vefSUS \ \ Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and others Present : Mr. A.S.Rajput, counsel for the petitioners. Mrs. Anju Ahuja, Deputy Government Advocate for the respondents/State. GRDER (Passed on 3ra of October, 2006) By this petition under Articles 226f227 of the Constitution of India. the petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to pay the increments and seniority on theybasis of the date of their initial appointments in the light of the decision rendered by the learned State Administrative Tribunal. Jabaipur in Orlginal.Application No.1452 of 1998 (Harish Chand Singh and others vs. State of MP. and others) dated 31 -1 -2000. Original Application No.802 of 1998 (Akhilesh Mishra and others vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others) and Originai Application No.991 of 1998 (Ramayan Prasad Dwivedi and others vs. State of MP. and others). 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners placed on record a copy of the order dated 20-9-2006 passed by this Court in Writ Petiiion (3.) No.5137 of 2006 (Meghraj Tandan vs. Sfate of Chham'sgarh and others) and submits that the petitioners are similarly situated, therefore the simiiar order may be passed. 3. The cases of the petitioners are that they were appointed as Assistant Teachers in the Schooi Education Department on probation for a period of two years with the fixed saiary. However, later on. after completion of two years’ probation. the petitioners were regularized, but, they were not given the regular pay—scale. Other similarly situated teachers moved the State Administrative Tribunal. Jabalpur for regular pay-scale, wherein learned Tribunal, vide order dated 31-1—2000‘ allowed the same. The petitioners made several representations to accord the same treatment as they are also similarly situated teachers, but, the respondents have not paid any heed. Thus, this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners may be allowed to make a representation to respondent No.1 to give similar treatment to the petitioners and the same pay-scate which has been sanctioned to other similarly situated teachers o n account of the order of the State Administrative Tribunal dated 31-1- 2000, to which learned counsel for the respondents/State has no objection. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in the opinion of this Court, the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners appears to be reasonable. Therefore, the petitioners are allowed to make a representaiion within a period of two weeks from today to respondent No.1. raising al! theif grievances and, in iurn. respondent No1 shall decide the said representation in an objective manner within a period of 3O days from the date of receipt of such representation, after considering ali the points raised by the petitioners and taking into account the order dated 31-1-2000 passed by the iearned State Administrative Tribunal in Original Appiication No.1452 of 1998. and if the petitioners stand on the same footings, as the petitioners in the Originai Appiication No.1452 of 1998, then they be also sanctioned the same pay-scale and seniority. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid direction. No order as to costs. t..\ Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- satish K. Agnihom Judge Gopal /-\