IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETmON' (S) No7.53Y0f2011 (M PETITIONER: Ramdayal Sahu S/o Late Shri, Laxminarayan Sahu aged about 57 years, U.D.T. (Basic), Middle School,-De-W%bha-t-, Block Balod, Dist‘ Durg. (C.G.) 9" /' VERSUS $ RESPONDENTS : 1. The State of Chhattisgarh, E. through the Secretary, School ‘ gg‘ Educatmn Department, .a .- Mantralay at DtK.S. Bhawan, 0‘ ”it“{Ur/(K 2. WKRaipur The Commissioner, (C.G.) Public “adipgv‘v 0% Instructions, Chhattisgarh, " Raipur (co) 9W . §6‘-&‘ ...... ‘ 3. The District Education Officer, District — Durg, (C.G.) 'I .v . WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE k“ CONSTITUTION OF INDIA W —_._....__‘ g ‘. §> HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SB : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITINKER DIWAKER W~P.[S).NO. 7595/201 1 Shn‘ S.K.’I‘homas, counse} for the petitioner. Shn' Braveen Das, Dy. GA. for the State. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ORDER (14.12.2011) Grievance of the petitimmr in the pressnt petition is that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher (Trainee) on a. fixed pay scale of Rs. 100- 150 and after completion of probation, he was granted regular pay scale of Rs. 1694300. Contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that he is entitled for regular pay scale with effect from the date I of initial appointment and his case is squarely covered with number of decisions passed by this Court and also the judgment rendered by the M.P. State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A. No. 2745/89 madhukant Yadu &. 56 Others Vs. state ofMP. & Others) where in it has been held that similarly placed teachers are entitled for regular pay scale from the date of their initial appointment. It is not disputed by both the parties that the matter was taken up by the State to the Apex Court but the appeal was also dismissed by the Apex Court upholding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitled for regular pay scale from the date of their initial appointment. In View of the above submission made by the counsel for the parties, the petition is disposed of in the same terms i.e. the petitioner is granted liberty to make a representation, if so advised, in PETITIONER Ramdayal Sahu versus RESPONDENTS Sfate of Chhatrisgarh &. Others subsequently confirmed b Petition (Civil) No Inay “V1 F: § $3*5'9($3QQ W5’ Fr m§ E?9-:?c3w'B Q a Sd/— Pritinker Diwaker Judge