{g ha’gf” HON ‘ BLE S. B. IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 7 aOg l 2010 PETITIONERS: 1. Smt Sandhya Tarke, W/o Shri K. Tarke, Aged about 54 years, Post- Lecturer, R/o Qr. No. H/2, Nayapara, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, C.G. Smt Karuna Tiwari, W/o Shri K.L.Tiwari, Aged about 54 years, Post— Lecturer, R/o Qr. N0. T/13, D. N.K; Colony, Dharampura No.2, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, C.G. ,8. Shri Kanhaiya Lai Tiwari, S/o Late Shri B.D. Tiwari, Aged about 58 years, Post- Head Master, R/o Qr. No. T/13, D.N.K. Colony, Dharampura No.2, Jagdaipur, District Bastar, C.G. /4. Smt Shanti Nayak, W/o Shri Ashok Nayak, Aged about’58 years,PoSt- VHe’ad Master R/o Civil Line, Near Bhagat Singh Sc’booi, Jagdaipur, District Bastar, C.G. > /5. Smt Jaishree. Shrivastava, W/o Shri Devendra ShrivastavayAged about 52 years, Post U.D.Ti, R/o Near Circuit House, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, C.G. / Ku. Aruna D’vjviy'edi, D/o, Late Shri M.L. Dwivedi, Aged about 60 years, Post— U.D.T., R/o Ambedkar Ward, Highway Channel Road, Jagdaipur, District Bastar,C.G. (/7. Smt Jainab Khan, W/o Shri M. H. Khan, Aged about 53 years, Post - Head Master, R/o Qr. No. H-24, Motitalab Para, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, C.G. /8 /Aged Ku Harsha about Jam 54 years, D/o Shri Post- Labh Head Shankar Master, Jijani, R/o Nayapara, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, C.G. ,«9. Smt Shakuntala Thakur, W/o Shri Sudhir Kumar Thakur, Aged about 55 years, Post- Assistant Teacher, R/o Vrindavan Colony, Government Qr. No. H-24, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, C.G. /10. Subal Chandra Biswas, S/o Late Shri Tarachand BisWas, Aged about 53 years, ,Post- Head Master, R/o Pakhanjur, Shubhpalli, Po‘st Pakhanjur, Kanker, District Kanker, C.G. 11. Smt Shanti Sahu, W/o Shri Santuram Sahu, Aged about 57 years, Post- U.D.T., R/o Lalbagh, Aamaguda, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, C.G. W ’ / .x w VERSUS State of Chha T mugh the Secretary, Education Department, Ministry, D.K.S. Building, Rafpur, C.G. \_ ESPONDENTS: The Assistan Tribal Welfa Jagdalpur, The Assistant Tribal Welfare t Commissioner, re Department, District Bastar, C.G. Commissioner, Department, Kanker, District Kanker, C.G. ducation Officer,_ strict Bastar, C.G. Kanker, Distr ducation Officer, The District E Jagdalpur, Di The District E ict Kanker, C.G.r “ WC = =8££Luué aé i‘Lunc cac aaa a a WW.W.W m 1m; Wm Mmwim‘g 1 msaWLq -yp S 3.. HON’BLE JU$TICE MR. PR] INKER DIWAKER G9 12 2010 Shri Alok Dewangan, ccunsel f0 the petitioners. Shri Sumesh Bajaj, GA. for. tha tam. Grievance of the petitioners in he present petition is that the petitioners were appointed as Assistan Teachers on a fixed pay scaie of Rs. 100 for a period of one year an after compietion of probation, they were granted regular pay scale of s. 169-300. Contention of the counsel for t e petitioners is that they are entitled for regular pay scale with ffect from the date of initial appointment and their case is squ rely covered with number of decisions passed by this Court and als the judgment rendered by the M.P. State Administrative Tribunal, J balpur in O.A. No. 2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu t 56 Others Vs. S te of M.P. & Others) wherein it has been held that similarly placed chers are entitled for regular pay scale from the date of their initial pointment. It is not disputed by both the pa ,ies 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 decis on of the Tribunal to the effect that the TeachersjAssistant Teache are entitled for regular pay ‘ i V scale from the date of their initial appo ntment. 3 i In v1ew of the above SLbImSSiO made by the counsel for the I parties the petition/i/ disposed of in the same terms 1e the i petitioners are granted liberty to make a representation, if so adVised, in the light of the aforesaid ju nt and the circular dated ‘ 27. 12.2008 (Annexure P/6) and in tur , the concerned respondent is directed to consider their case on its own merits and in its ‘ [nieé‘ a r e d mwawm %Wm (1 perspsctive. If the petitioner stands on passed by the State Administrate ’l‘J supra) and subsequently confirmed by Jeave Petition (Civil) No. 6892/93 by order dated 3.1.1995, the oetitioner may be entitled to same relief accordingly. It is expected from the state aut after due scrutiny of the facts. It is made clear that this Court . an merits of the case and the authority 1as not expressed any opinion concerned would be at liberty to decide the representation strictly in accordance with law. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker' Judge horities to pass suitable order New the same footing as per order ibunal in Madhukant Yadu the Supreme Court in Special