4;‘g ‘ H M HIGH COURT OF CHHATTI$GARH1 BILASPUR WP. ($3 No.7543 of 2%? PETiTiONER Kandarp Pradhan S/o- Ghasiya Pwdhan, aged about 51 years, Occupatéon- Assistant Teacher, at primary Schoo! Pathiapaii, DiStrict- Mahasamund (C.G.) Versus RESPONDENTS 1 State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of School Eciucatron, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur. (0.9.) District Education Officer, District- Mahasamund {c.G.) Biock Education Officer, Biock -— Basane, District~ Mahasamund (C.G.) WRIT PETiTlDN UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CDNSTiTUTiON OF iNDiA Appearance: Shri F.S. Khare, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sumit Verma, Panei Lawyerfor the, State on advance copy. ORAL ORDER (26.12230?) SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J \\ Heard. Learned counsei for the petitioner submits that the issue invoived in the case is as to whether the petitioner is entitied to regular pay scaie w.e.f. the date of initiai 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 Tribunal, Jabalpur in 0A. No.2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 others Vs. State of MP. and others), wherein, it was held that the simiiarly situated teachers are entitied to reguiar pay scaie w.e.f. the date of initiai appointment. The matter was taken up to the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6892/93. The said petition was dismissed by the Hon’bie Supreme Court uphoiding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitled to reguiar pay scale from the date of initial appointment. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that this Court, while considering the same issue in Ram Kumat Sahu and others Vs. State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and another (W.P.(S) No.813 of 2007) by order dated 12.2.2007, has granted regular pay scale wef. the date of initial appointment. Learned counsei for the parties jointly submits that this case is squarely oovered by the decision of this Court in the case of Ram Kumar Sahu and another (supra). in View of that, this petition is aiiowed in the same terms. However, this order shaii be subject to aii verifications made by the " State regarding facts pieaded in t‘ne petition. Sunil Kumar Sinha R vatti " Sdl— i Judge "‘” "‘ vi W ‘ivzoorJb‘OOO. a ;i