^ HIGH COimT OF CHHATTTSGAMI AT BTTASPTTR PETITIONERS WTitPetition^No. 3171 of2008 1. Kashiram Ratiior son ofShri Bhagi Ram Rathor aged 56 years Primary School Sanjai Nagar Nariyara Via Akaltara, Distt. Janjgir Champa (CG). 2. Navinchand Kaser son of Ganesh Kaser Hanuman Chowk Kaseipara Champa^ Distt. Janigir Champa (CG). VERSUS RESPQNDENTS : 1. State of Chhattisgarh, tiirough Secretary, School Education Department, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CO). 2. District Educatioii Officer, Jaiijgir Champa (CG). 3. Block Education Officer, Block Janjgir Champa, Distt. Janjgir Champa (CG). ^ (WKT! PETmON IJNDER ARTICU5 226 OF THE CONSTmmON OF INDIA) tSB: Hon'Me Mr. Satjsh K. Affmhotn. J.^ Present : Shn 8.K. Mishra, Advocate for the petitioners. Sliri M.P.S. Bhatia, Deputy Govt. Advocate for the State/respondents. ORALORDER (Passed on 25UI day ofJmie, 2008) With the coiisent of the parties, the matter is taken up for hearisig finally. 1. The petitioners were appointed as Assistant Teachei's on fixed pay of P.s. 100/-. After completion oft^/o years ofprobation period, they were gmnted regular pay scale. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitionei-s submits that tiie issue involved in the case is asto whether, the petitioners are entitled to regidar pay scale w,e.£ the date imtial appoiiitment or after completion ofprobation period. 2. The issue involved, herein was considered by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpm- in O.A. No. 2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 others Vs. State ofM.P. & others), wherein it was held that the similai'ly situated teachers ai'e entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of imtial appomtmeiit. TIie matter was taken up to Hon^ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civi!) No. 6892/93. f • The said petition was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court upholdmg the decision of the Tribunal to the effect tliat tlie Teacliers/Assistmit Teachers are entitled to regular pay scale from date of iiiitial appointment. 3. In view ofthe above stated submissions made b}/ leamed counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of m the same temis i.e. the petitioiiers are granted libeily to make a represeiitation, if so advised, to consider their case, ifthey stand on the same footmgs as per order dated 24.08.1992 by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur, in OA. No. 2745 of 89 Madhukant Yadu (sapra) a$id subsequently confiiTned by order dated 03.01.1994 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court m Special Leave Petitio!! (Civil) No. 6892/93 and grant relief accordingly, 4. In view of the foregomg, this petition is disposed of. No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Thakar