’,_ \9 W HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 223 0f2008 (WRIT PETIHON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) @E: Hon’ble Mr. Satis}; K. Agnihotri, .1.) LI. Presorrt : Shn' Somkant Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. ( Shri SK. Mishra , Fans] Lawyer for the State/respondents. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 14m ofJanuary, 2008) The petitioner was appointed on 21.01.1994 as Assistant Teachers on fixed pay of Rs. 500/-. After completion ofprobation, the petitioner was granted regular pay scale. Similarly situated employees had approached the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur. The Tribunal passed the order on 24.08.1992 in O.A. No. 2745/89 {Madhukarrt Yadu and 56 others Vs. State of MP. & Others). It was further held that the said benefit would he given to all the teachers \ and they should not be compelled to approach the Tribunal for similar benefit individually or collectively. 4. Being aggrieved, the then State of Madhya Pradesh had filed the Special Leave Petition (Civil) N0. 6892/93 impugting the order dated 24.08.1992 passed by the Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in OA No. 2745/89. The Hon‘ble Supreme Court. alter hearing counsel for the parties, dismissed the Special Leave Petition and having regard to the large financial implications, granted one year's time to / \ ./ \ w PEJIEIQ§ER Jagnnath Dhmv S/o Shri Remai Dhmv Aged about 39 wars, Head Master, Govt. ,Pn'mary School, Khudmudi, Block Bemetam, Distt. Durg (CG). VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Education & Tribal Department, DKS Bhavan, Raipur (CG). 2. District Education Ofiicer, Distt. Durg (CG). same the, claim for the armars without intgrest Vida order dated 03.f)1.1994, It was further obssrved that tlm intervention would work out their rightS in aceordance wiih law. This order dated 24.08.1992 passed by the Trihunal in 0A. N0. 2745/1989 is applicabie to the petitioners being similarly situated and they are accordingly entitled to the same benefit. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this Court while eonsidering the same issue in Ram Kumar Sahu and others Vs. State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and another in Writ Petition (S) No. 813 of 2007 by order dated 12.02.2007, has granted regular pay scale wef. the date of initial appointment. Learned eounsel appearing for the parties jointly submit that this ease is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Ram Kumar Sahu and others Vs. State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and another (Supra). However, the state is at liberty to verify the facts of appointment asto whether the case of the petitioner is similar to that of the order dated ‘ 12.02.2007 passed by this court in WP. (S) N0. 813 of 2007 (Supra). In View of that this petition is allowed in the same terms. No order asto Sd/- Satish K. Agnihntri Judge costs. i: \ w if ‘l t l i