c^\ ^^ (S) BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGHCOURTOF CMHATTXSGARH AT BU.ASPUR WRIT PETITION fS) No,^^ /2009 peaTioNER ^ Keju Lal Gaikwad, S/o Baldeo Prasad, Agedabout54 years, Working as Lecturer R/o C/o Govt. High School Kachhe, District Kanker, C.G. RESPQNDENTS VERSUS 1. -.•••'5, r^4€^ ^^s^y ^^s^ ?5''^--; ^" ..-/ !<^-"" ^ ••^ ^ ;i * 'S S /i >.-.. |(:Q»AM%^ 2^ 3. 4. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department of Scheduled Tribe and Scheduled Caste Development, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan,Raipur, C.G. District Educationofficeo Kanker; District North Bastar (Kanker), C.G. Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development, Kanker District North Bastar (Kanker), C.G. District Treasury Officer, Treasury Kanker District North Bastar (Kanker), C.G. |lliMR a>E?naiON UNDERARTICI.E 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF ESN.EBAK .•.••.--. .1. . • : . ITHe^aBove named petitjoQ£!_ Amit HIGHGOtlRTQEC'HHATnSGrARH^vrSB.ASPUR PETmQNER WRTT PETmON fS) No. 6677 of2009 Keju Lsl Gaitarad. . .:VERSUS, , ; State ofChhattisgarii & 30)hars. RESPONDENTS WRrrPETmONUNDERARTK'LE 226 Cff THE GONSTrFUiaON OEINDIA SBiHon'bleShriSatishK.A^aUltttri.J. jE^esait:" SIui Satyendra Sahu.Advucatefbrthepetitiana'. „, SliriN.N.R&^PanelLawyefiortheStatBtespoadetrts. ' ORDERfORAL) '„; . ' ; : f '1; (Passed on 16tt day af NovetnbM, 200?) With the consent of leained counsel appearing for tfae partfcs, tke petition is lieaid finally. ; Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits Aat ttie lietitionar w;u appointed initially on a fixed pay seale on probation. After completioB of poba&m period, thepetitioner was granted r^^ fHTtiier submits llurttheissu&invulved^m pelitioaCTas entitled to regular pay sc^ with efl^ fio^ after conipletionofprobatiunperiod. TTie issue involved herein was considered by the Madhya I^'adesli' State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpm- (^or riort "the SAT"y m O.A tST4SiS9 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 others vs. Sate qfM.P. & offiers), whweia it was teM that the similariy situated teachers are eatftfad to regularpay scde w*^. the date- ofimtialapppmtmeDt/ThenMtterWastakenuptotheSuptemeCtourt.Tlle^ •was dismissed by tihe Supreme Court, iqAolding (he deeision of ths TribiBial te the efifect fhat fte Teachers/Assistaat Teachers are eatitled to regul»^pay|s8ale firon date ofinitialappointment. = ^! 'In view ofthe above submissioas made t»ylearnsd counsel fbr the parties, theflwtt petition is disposed ofiffi thesame terms i.e., tiie petitioiisr is granted lilidtysto make arepreseiitation, if so advised, to consider his case on its o'w»fflait and id, its perspeetive. Ifthepetitionerstands onthesamefootingsaspa-orderpassedby the SAT inMadhukant Yadu (supra) aad sttbsequentfy con&ffied by Ule SujwMne Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 6S92f93 by orda- dated 3-1-M!9^ tta petitioner maY?be entifled to saaae Teliefaccordinelv. 2. Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge