^^flte^- r' F< \QO' IW'31+rE"HIGH COURT OF CHMATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CG) PETITIONER i RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION (S) N0.^^9/2006 /^ Dinesh Prasad Sharma, aged about 42 years, son of Shri Jaisharan Prasad Sharma, Assistant Teacher, Government Middle School, Bansbahar, Vikas Khand Kansabel, Tahsil Bagicha, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh) VERSUS ^1. State of Chhattisgarh, through - Secretary, Department of School Education, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) ^ 2. The District Education Officer, Jashpur (C.G.) -^ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 22'6 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, J11SH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT SILASPUR SINGLEBENCH : HON'BLE MR. SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI. J. WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.6962 OF 2006 .•W7t, Yf'~ Petitienere Shubhash Chandra Verma and others versus ResBQndente State of Chhattisgarh and others WRIT PETITION (S.l N0.6967 OF 2006 PetitLonere Smt. Jyoteshwari Rao and another versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.6968 OF 2006 -A- Petltioners Kumari Rampyari Dheewar and another versus Respondents State df Chhatlisgarh and another WRy PETLTION (S.) N0.69S9 OF 2006 Petitloner Dinesh Prasad Shanna Respondents yersys State of Chhattisgarh and another X. WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.6970 OF 2006 Petitioner Kamil Tirky versus ResBondents State of Chhattisgarh and another Petitioner WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.6971 OF 2006 Bal Chand Sahu versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.6979 OF 2006 Petitioner ResBondents versus Maniram Sahu State of Chhattisgarh and others -A WRIT P6TITION (S.) N0.6980 OF 2006 Petitioners Pranadhar Lahare and others versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.6981 OF 2006 Petitioners Sunder Lal Sonwani and others versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.6982 OF 2006 Petitioners Narottam Patel and others versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.6983 OF 2006 Petitioners Respondents versys RamkrishnaSahu and others State of Chhattisgarh and others WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.6984 OF 2006 Petitioners Kaushal Prasad Patel and others versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others WRITPETITION (S.1 N0.6985 OF 2006 '.\. Petitioners Respondents versus Yogesh Patel and another State of Chhattisgarh and others Present : Mr. Anil Singh Rajput, Mr. A.N.Bhakta, Mr. O.P.Sahu and Mr. Anil Mourya, counsel forthe petitioner(3). Mr. Arun Sao, Government Advocate and Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents. ith QRDER (Passed on 14'" Day of December, 2006) -4(. By this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to pay the increments and seniority on the basis of the date of their initial appointment in the light of the decision rendered by the !eamed State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in Original Application No.1452 of 1998 (Harish Chand Singh and others vs. State of M.P. and others} dated 31-1-2000, Original Application No.802 of tSQQ (Akhilesh Mfehra and others vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and offiers) and Original Application No.991 of 1998 (Ramayan Prasad Dmvedi and others vs. StateofM.P. and others). 2. Learned counset appearing for the petitioners placed on record a copy of the order dated 3-10-2006 passed by this Court in Writ Petition (S.) No.5191 of 2006 (Har Prasad Kurre and offfers vs. Stateof ChhatSsgarh and otters) and submit that the petitioners are similarly situated, therefore, thesimilar order may be passed. 3. The present batchof writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order as the facts and question of law involved in these petitions are common. 4. The cases of the petitioners are that they were appointed as Teacher in the School Education Department on probation for a period of two years with the fixed salary. However, later on, after completion of Mvo years' probation, the petitioners were regularized, but, they were not given the regular pay-scale. Other similarly situated teachere 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 teacher, but, the respondents have not paid any heed. Thus, this petition. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submit 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-scale which has been sanctioned to other similarly situated teachers on account of the order of the State Administrative Tribunal dated 31-1- 2000, to which learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents have no objection. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing 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 representation within a period of two weeks from today to respondent No.1, raising all their grievances and, in turn, respondent No.1 shall decide the said representation in an objective manner within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of such representation, after considering alt the points raised by the petitioners and taking into account the order dated 31-1-2000 passed by the learned State Administrative Tribunal in Original Application No. 1452 of 1998, and if the petitioners stand on the same footings, as the Gopal ^s^) petitionere in the Original Application No.1452 of 1998, then they be also sanctioned the same pay-scale and seniority. 7. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid direction. No order as to costs. 8. A copy of this order be placed on the record of the connected writ petitions. -— — - — ——; Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ^-