r Q} HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P.(5) No. 3212 of 2008 1. Rakesh Kumar Kaushik, Sfa. Lafe 5hr§ .Samaru Ram Kaushik, Aged abou? 45 years, R/o. Village Post-Kunm, P‘S. & Tahsil Dhar-siwa, Bis-Md %ipur (6.6.), Warking as’ Assistan'r Teacher in 50w. Primary SchooL Parastami, Tuhsii & Districf Ruipur (C.G.) 2. Bhuvanlal Gilhare, 5/0. ShFi Mo'Hlal Gilhare, Aged abouf 48 years, Working as Assistanf ' Teacher in 60w. Primary School, Devri, P.S. & Tahsil Dharsiwa, District Raipur (6.6.) R/o. Wage Dew-i, P5. & Tahsif Dharsiwa, Dis‘rric? Raipur- (C.6.) ‘ Kamlakan‘f .Slmrma, 5/0. Trayambakeshwai‘ Prasad Shawna, Aged abou? 45 year-s, Warking as Assismm‘ Teaéher in Govt Middle School, Kunm, R/a. Village Paras'tnmi, Pasi' Dhrwsiwa, District Raipur (6.6.) . Sfa'fe of Chhaffisgarh, Through fha Secremry, Depcrfmen'r of Education, Manfmiaya, D.K.5. Sham, Raipur 2. Direc'tm‘ Public Ins'l'ruc?ion Chhafisgnrh Government, Ruipur 3. District Educafion-Officer. DisTricT Korea (Baikun‘i‘hpur) (CE) Pz'fifianers Versu Respmdznfs $8: Hon’ble Mr. 3’us'fite $g1‘ish K. Agniho‘i‘ri. J Shri Vinny Pandey, Advocate appears on The aufhor-ii‘y 0f Shri Anand Kumar Tiwari, Advoca'fe far fhe pa‘fi'i’ioner. Miss Suni‘l'a Jain, Pane! Lawyer far ‘i'he responden‘ts. ORAL ORDER (Passed an ms 26*“ bay af June, zoos) 1. Wi'rh 'H'Ie consen‘i‘ uf learned munsal' appearing for 1he par'l'ias, flue ma‘H'er'is heard firially. 2. Learnecl counsel appearing for we pe-ri-rianers submi'rs +l1af flag efi'rioners were appain‘l'ed as Assis'lan'l' Teacher in 'l‘he year 1982 an ~\.p . s ¥ ‘ .23 *zl" fixed pay af Qs. 3001-. Affer complefian af probafian period, fhe pa‘ri‘finnzrs were gmnfed faguhr pay scale. He further submifs +ha+ Hm issue invaivzd ir1 ‘l’he mse is asfo whe'l‘har fha pa'fH'ionars am en+i+l2d +a regular pay scale wef. 'H'ie da'l'e af ini'rial appoivmnenf ar affer comple‘l'ion of pmbafian periad‘ The issue inlvd, herein was consider by fhe Mndlnya Pmdesh 5+a1'e Adminisfm-Hve Tribul, Jabnlpur in O.A. Na. 2745/89 (Madhukm‘l' Vadu and 56 ofhers Vs. Safe o MP. & nfh wherein H was held Tha'l' 1‘l1e simarly sima'l' fenchers are en'l'i'l’led +0 regular pa sca ‘ wef. e da'l'e c ini'l'ial appai‘l'ment The a‘H'er was fake-up 'l'a fhe Hari'ble Supreme Caur'l'. The appeal was dismissed by +he Honle Supreme Caur'l' upolding ‘'he decision af fhe Tribunal n 1’he effec'l' 'l'ha‘i‘ 1e achers/Asss'tan‘l' Teachers are enfi‘fied 'ra regular pay sce { In view af 1h abave sfae subssan made by learnedaunsel for +he par-Hes, {he wri+ pe‘ri'rian is diped o in the same +em i.e., he pe‘ii‘i'ianers are gran'i'ed liber‘l'y +0 make a represea'l'ion, if so advised, + s , d i na b n A.N 25 ( ) d n 4 passed by +l1e Hon‘ble Supreine Couri' in $3ecial ave Pefi‘i'ion Civil) No. 6892/93 a gran relief accrdingly. In view of ‘rh forging, ‘l'he pe‘l’i'’ion is disposed of. o order asfo cesfs. h Tei al ram fhe da're af ini'l'ial appcin'i'ment . e f miis -c sos f rs f a consider +heir cases, if 1hey fand ar- 1'he same foo‘i'ings as per 1'he arder a‘i'ed 24.8.1992 passed by fhe Madhya Pradesh S'l'a'e Adminis‘i'ra'i'ive Tribul, Jaalpur, i O.o. 74 of 89 Madhukan'i' Vadu) {mpra an subsequefly canfirmed by fhe order da'ied 3.1.199 le ( Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Thakur 7:"“i’sr. . vae ed na f f ersL il ed y le +h f n m n ‘b h I i nf nd f o . e eo l N