HIGH COURT OE CHHATTISGARHAT BILASPVR S.B. : HON'BLE MR. SATI8HK. AGNmOTRL J. WRIT PETITION (S) No. 1447 of2W7. PETITIONER RE8PONDENTS Shiv Prasad Mahto, S/o. Kamta Prasad Mahto, Aged about 44 years, Assistant Teaeher, Ctovemment Primfiiy School, Kusmunda, District Korba (C.G.) VER8U8 1. State of Chhatti^aA, Throogh Ifae Secretary, Tribal Welfare & Education Dei^rtaienl, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Comnussioner, Tribal Welfere Department, Raipur(C.G.) 3. The Assistant CCTnimssioaer, Tribal Welfare Departmeat, Koifaa 4. The Block Edueation Officegr, Katghora, District Korba(C.G.) Present: Shri Ahswani Shukla, Advocats for the petitiener. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Panel Lawycr for fhe State/respondents. ORDER (Passed on 13m Maich 2007) 1. The petitioner was appointed on 09.01.1986 as Dqmly Teaeher on a fixed pay scale of Rs. 300/-. ASet completion <rf two years of probation, he was grantedregulat pay scale. 2. Learoed counsel appearing for the petitioner sulimit Aat the issue involved ia tfae case is asto wheAer, the petitioaer is entitled to FegulaF pay seale w.e.f. tiie dato of iaitial a^iQiatiaeBt or dateof completionofprobationperiod. the 3. The issue mvolved, herein was considered by fte Mrihya Pradesh State Administrative Tribiinal, Jabalpur in O.A. No. 2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 others Vs. State of M.P. & ofhers), wherein it was held that thesimilariy situated teachers are eatitied to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment. The mattor was tdcen-up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Lesve Petition (Civil) No. 6892/93. The said petition was dismis»dby the Hon'ble Supreme Court upholding the decision ofthe Tribunal to the effect that Ae Teachers/Assistaat Teachers are entitled to regular pay scale from date ofinitial appoiBtmeat. 4, Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner further submitstiiat ttus Court, wfaile considering fhe same issue in Sushil Tiwetri & otbeis Vs. State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & otiiere (W.P. (S) No. 5976 of 2006) by order dated 7-11-2006, has granted reguiar pay scale w.e.f. tite date ofinitial appointment. 5. Learaed counsel appearing for tiie parties jointiy SBbmit that tiiis case is squarely covCTed by the decision ofthis Court in the case of Sushi! Tiwari & others Vs. State Govt, of Chliattisgarii & others (Supra). 6. In view ofthat, this petition is allowed in ibe same tenns. No order astoeoste. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Amit