^ c^i<y^7 IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION fSl N0. /< OF 2010 L. _._„... .^",..j: ^A <?<" A WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE ^ CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT/WRITS. ORDER/ORDERS, DIRECTION/DIRECTIONS ETC. -rjpuju-j^—^ PETITIONER / Shivcharan Netam, S/o Shoap Singh, aged about 54 years, Occupation- Lecturer Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School, Narharpur, District, Kanker, (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS /l: State of Chhattisgarh through : z?-'loct fs^ Secretary TribaffaT Welfare Department, through D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur/ District Raipur (C.G.) ^? ^%<^./ ^1?^ 5^ ^"V^J>* ^ ^2: Assistant CommissiQner ~T^ltst.. TribTmal Welfare Department, Distt. Kanker/ Bastar (C.G.) /3: Treasury, Accountants & Pension Distt. Kanker/Bastar (C.G.) (.-.. HIGH GOUR'r OF CHHATTI8GARH AJ BILASPUR WRIT PETITION CS) No. 11 of2010. PETITIONER RE8PQNDENTS ShivcharanNetam. VER8US State ofChhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble SliriSatish K. Asnihotri^J. Present: Smt. HamidaSiddique, Advocate forfhe petitioner. ShriP.K.Bhaduri.PaneILawyer^^^ ORALORDER (Passed on 06m day of January, 2010) With the consent oftheparties, the matter is taken up fbr hearing finally. 1 > The petitioner was initially appointed on a fixed pay of Rs. 100A-. After completion ofprobatiori period, he was granted regular pay scale. 2. Leamed counsel appearing fbr the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the case is asto whether, the petitioner is entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of imtial appointment or after completion of probation period. 3. The issue involved, herein was considered by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A. No. 2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 others Vs. State ofM.P. & others), wlierem it was held that the similarly situated teachers are entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f the date of initial appomtment. The mattei'was taken up to Hon'blc Supreme Court m Special Leave Petition(Civil)No. 6892/93. The said petition was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court upholding fhe decision offlie Tribynal to flie € effect that the Teacher^Assist^ entifled to regular pay scale j6^)mdateofimtialappointo 4. Leamed counsel appearing fbr the petitioner also submits that this court, while considering the same issue in Amar Sai Ram & others v. State of Chhattisgarh & ofhers [W.P. (S) No.4725/2006] by order dated l .09.2006, allowed the petitioners to make a representation within a period often days, raising all their grievances. 5. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted liberty to make^^^^^^^^a representation raismg all his grievaiwes in light ofth^^^^a the concemed respondent is directed to decide the fq5reserrtation, if airy, in accordance with law, on its own merits, within a period of8 weeks fromthe date ofreceipt ofthe representation, subject to verification ofthe facts. 6. In view ofthe foregoing, this petition is disposed of. No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ^