K ,xé’ saga L, SLB. (Service Matter) 1N THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATI‘ISGARH) WRIT PETITION(S) Nof‘l L8€/2006. PETITIONERS: . // 1. Bhuvneshwar Patel, S/o Kanhaiya Lal, aged about 37 years, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kondatarai, Dist. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. /2. Anil Kumar Gupta, S/ o Shyam Sundar, aged about 37 years, Asst. Teacher, Govt. Middle School, Garewani, Di. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 3. Hitendra Singh Patel, S/o J.L,Patel, ged about 3 years, Asst. eacher, Govt. High Scool, Dharamjaigarh, Raigarh, Dist. Ragarh, Chhattisgarh. a 9 T (4/. bu Lal Patel, S/ o Gayram Patel, aaged about 39 years, Asst. Teacher, Govt. Hiher Secondary School, Kondatarai, Dist. Rigarh, Chhattisgarh. /Gas Prasad Shu, S/o Shri Lakesh Ram, aged about 39 year, Govt. Higher Scondy chool ura, District Raigarh, hattisgarh. Respondents {/1». State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary School Education Department Ministry D.K.S.Bhawan, Raipur, r‘ O * Chhattisgarh. x}; 1 i4 { . %\“% 2 The District Education Officer, Raigarh iv ‘ h \33'7‘ xk ‘0 ,, WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/@ OF THE (4. ’ CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONERS: st , / h i Ba a g a 5‘neh a ear S M Ch VERSUS XI-HC—78 3am,ww,1%mgx mama; . M;E;.i?1.%.éu.aga1 200 mm (W) m$rf§ai$ wmm‘ WWW&'WW mmwm %31%q3n%31 U‘Uf £UUI Shri O.P. Sahu, learned counsel for the petitioners. Smt. Sunita Jain, learnec P.L. for the State/respondents. By this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to pay the increments and seniority on 'he basis of the date of their initial appointment in the light of the ecision rendered by the learned State Administrative Tribunal, Jab lpur in Original Appiioation No. 1452/1998 (Harish Chandra Si gh and others Vs. State of MP. and others) dated 31 .1 .2000 2. Learned counsel appea ing for the petitioners placed reliance on the order dated 3rd Octob r 2006 passed by this Court in Writ Petition (S) No. 5473/2006 (R kesh Kumar Sharma and another Vs. State of Chhattisgarh rand ohers) and in Writ Petition (S) No. 5474/2006 (Jai Nath Bajpai Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others) and submits that the petitioners are similarly situated, therefore, the similar order may be passed. 3. The case of the petit ers is that they were appointed as Assistant Teachers in the Sch ol Education Department on probation for a period of two years with t e fixed salary. However, later on, after completion of two years’ proba ion, the petitioner was regularized but, they were not given the regula pay scale from the date of their initial appointment. Other similarly situated teachers moved the State Administrative Tribunal, Jab lpur for regular pay-scale, wherein learned Tribunal vide order da ed 31.1.2000 allowed the same. The petitioners made several i r XI—HC-78 69..Q HW,®?W@W WmwJaaJsz£aAéaa 200 mm (W) WWW WWW WW§WW WWW ém%mw%21 treatment as they were also sinilarly situated, but, the respondents have not paid any heed. Hence, this petition. t4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners may be allowed to make a representation to respondent No.1 to give simiiar treatment to the petitimers and same pay-scale which has been sanctioned to other simila ly situated teachers on account of the order of the State Administrati e Tribunai dated 31.1.2000, to which learned counsel for the respond nts/State has no objection. 5. Having heard learned co nsel for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances the case, in the opinion of this Court, the limited prayer made by lear ed counsel for the petitioners appears to be reasonable. Therefore, t e petitioners are allowed to make a representation within a period o two weeks from today to respondent No.1, raising all their grievance and, in turn, respondent No.1 shalt decide the said representation i an objective manner within a period of 30 days from the date of eceipt of such representation, after considering all the points rais d by the petitioners and taking into account the order dated 31.1 2000 passed by the learned State Administrative Tribunal in Origin IApplication No. 1452/1998. 6. The writ petition is acco ingly disposed of with the aforesaid direction. No order as to costs. 7. Certified copy as per ruie . Sd/— Dhirendra Mishra Judge P.T.O.