0% 1679/? gs W.P., 5 N0. % /2010 PETITIONER SQMBLE BM” “fd/ur‘anik Pr‘asad Sharma, aged abou‘r 54 year's, S/o Lafe Madan Prasad Sharma, Upper Division Teacher, Government Middle School, Karmari, Block Churiya, DisTT. Rajnandgaon ('C.G.) 1. VERSUS Sfm‘e of Chha‘r’risgarh Through Secre‘rar'y, Trible Welfare Depar’rmen‘r /D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Trible Welfare Depar‘rmenf / Raipur (6.6.) 3. Trible Welfare Deparfmenf Rajnandgaon (6.6.) The Commissioner Assisfonf Commissioner 4. 5. Disfricf Educa’rion Officer, Rajnandgaon, Disfric’r—Rajnandgaon (6.6.) Block Educafion Officer Chhuria, Disfricf— Rajnandgaon (C.G.) is \ m‘ M IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (6.6.) / Qg; WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CO\ NSTITUION OF INDIA i HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR W Single Be‘nch: Hon’bie shri Manindra Mohan $hrivastavai J. WRIT PETITION (Si NO.3543I2010 ETlTiONER Pauranik Prasad Shanna Versus State of Chhattis’garh and others WRIT PET!TEON UNDER ARTICLE m OF THE CONSITUTIQN QF INDIA Present - ShnK S Pawar, counselfot the petitioner ; .u-na-uu RESPONDENTS Ms Sangeeta Mishra, Panel Lawyer for the State Qg’AL ORDER (Passed on 16"“ July, 201a) With the consent of the parties, the mattef is taken up for hearing finally. 1. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher on a fixed pay of Rs.100/- and thereafter Rs.150/-. After completion of his probation period, he was granted regular pay ecaie of Rs.169i~. . 2 Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner eubmits that the issue involved in the case rs as to whether the petitioner rs entitled to regular pay scale ‘ wrth effect from the date of rnrtrai appointment or after completion of probation perioci. l 3. The issue involved herein was considered by the Madhya Pradesh State i Adminlstrative Tribunal Jabalpur in OA No 274 o9 (Madhukant Yaou and 56 others v. State of MP. & others), wherein it was held that the similarly situated teachersare entitled to regular pay scale with effect from the date of initial appointment. The matter was taken up to the Hon‘ble Supreme Court in Special P M Leave Petition (Civii) No.6892f93. The said petition was dismissed by the Hon'bie Supreme Couit upholding the decision 'of the Tribunal to the effect that are entitied to regular pay scale from the date the Teachers/Assistant Teachers of initial appointment. 4. Learned counsei appearing for the petitioners further submits that this Court, while considering the same issue in Amer Sai Ram & Dibers v. State of ”’yChhattisgarh & Others (W.P.(S) No.4725i2006) by order dated 01l09l2006, ed the petitioners to make a representation within a period of ten days, allow raising all their grievances. the petitioner is granted liberty to make representation raising the aforesaid iudgment and the circuiar dated the concemed respondent is directed to on its own merits, within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of the representation, subiect to verification of the facts. this petition is disposed off. No order as to costs. A Sd/— 5. Accordingly, all his grievances in the light of 2711212008 (Annexure PI2) and in turn, decide the representation, if any, in accordance with law, 6. ln view of the foregoing, Q—Mgm . Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge