0^?)^-yy 2. Sjpaie IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) WRIT PETITION fS) NoM ( L(3~'/2011. PETITIONER: ^^^ ^^^A Chatrapal Singh, son of Korkoro Ram, aged about 57 years, working as Head Master, Govt. Middle School, Baniyatikra, Block Batouli, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. ^y'..^ €f€>^ '•^•••""" Respondents versus 1/State of Chhattisgarh, Through, The Secretaiy Tribal Welfare Department Ministry D.K.8.Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Commissioner, Schedule Tribe and Schedule Caste Development, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3. Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Sarguja, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 4. Block Education Officer, Batouli, Block Batouli, District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. 5. Joint Director, Treasury, Accounts, Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. ^ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CQNSTITUTION OF INDIA 1- ^.^^—^^ ^ ^^^^% HIGH COURT OF CMHATTISGARH AT BXLASPUR (Hon. Mr. Justice Pritinker Djwaker) Writ Petition fS^ No. 4145 of 2011 [QNER Chatrapal Singh VERSUS RESPONDENTS State of Chhattiagaph and othees Shr! Marlsh Khuntlya, counsel for the petlttoner. Shri N. N. Roy, P.L. for the State. WRFT PETmON UNDBR ARTXCI.K 228 OFTI^ coNSTrrunoN OFINDIA ORDER (01.08.2011) Grievance of the petitioner tn the present petitton is that the petitioner was appolnted as Deputy Teacher on a ffecect pay scale of Rs. 100 and after successfully eompleting the probation period, he was granted regular pay scale, 2. Contentlon of the counsel for the petitloner is thate he is entitted for regutar pay scale with effect from the date of inltial appointment and his case is squarely covered wjth number of declsions passed by this Court and also the judgment rendered by the M.P. State Adminlstrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in 0-A. Wo. 2745/89 (Witlliulfant Vaelw & 5<5 Others Vs. Stat®of M-P- & (Mieis) whereln it has been hetd that similarly ptacect teachers are entitled for regular pay scale from the data of their initial appolntment. 3. It is not disputed by both the parties fehat the matter was taken up by the State to the Apex Court but fehe appeal was also ctlsmissed by the Apex Court upholtftng the deeision of the Tribunaj to the effect that the Teachers/Assistant •^' ^.^.- Teachers are entitled for regular pay scale from the date of their injtial appointment. 4. in view of the above submission made by the counsel for the parties, the petition Is disposed of in the same terms i.e, the petitioner is granted liberty to make a represenlat »n, if so advised, In the light of the aforesaid judgment and the circular dated 27.12.2008 (Annexure P-2) and in tum, the concerned responclent is directed to eonsider his case on Its own merlts and in its perspective. If the petitioner ^ands on the same footing as per order passed by the State Administrative Tnbunal in Madhukant Yadu (supra) and subsequently confirmed by the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 6892/93 by order dated 03.01.95y the petltioner may be entitted to same rellefa<x:ordlngly, 5. It is expected from the State authortties to pass sultabte order after due scrutiny of the facts. 6. It is made clear that thls court has not expressed any opinlon on the merlts of the case and the authority concemed woutd be at liberty to declde the representatlon strictly in aceordance with law. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge