^^^- ^ ^R.tiO.---;:':^^--^^.,..... -3-v IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUMCATURE. AT BILASPUR fC.G.l W.P.fSl N0. A6 38 /2006 v&'rmovERt RE8POBDEBT8: Ganesh Ram Porte Son of / Shrt Maya Ram Porte, aged about 44 years, Occupatlon-, Asst. Teacher, Govt. Mitid.te'1 School Taroud/ Block Akaltara Dlstt. Janjgtr-champa (C.G.) State of Chhattlsgarh, through the Secretary Government of Chhatttsgarh Department of EducaUon, D.K.S. Bhawan Mantralaya, Ralpur (C.G.). 2. Dtrector Publlc Instructton, Ratpur (C.G.) v iftitW ' y-yy .-•^ '• ^y .-^y y 3. Dlstrtct EducaOon Offtcer,, Dlstt.-JanJglr Champa (C.G.) 4. Block Educatlon Offlcer, ^ Akattara, Dlstt.- Janjglr Champa (C.G.) •nsir FEimoN UPTOBR Aima.R -rat _tgs3 ov THE oopsTnvnoN OF SWSA VCSL BSSUANCK OF ABFROTRIATE XI-HC-78 *11*ICTI aiHTOl 3"ST'<l|i|ICI<(, »Tn'M'IS,ICIMK-I^ .q^ .^J0.^4.2.?y..€).c>^. 2QO ^ 3<i^ifi CBRfT (ytgi'i'T) sn^TqiTR-ii* aw sn^r sPiN; (}5.12.2006 By this petition under Artictes t|ie petitioner seeks a direction to the| e|nd seniority on the basis of ttie date] cjf the decision rendered by the J|abalpur in Original ApplicationNo. 21745/1989 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 |thers Vs.State of M.P. and others) d^ted 24.8.1992 TOTreiT HftcT 3TI^?T Shri Ajay Dwivedi, learned coui]isel Shri Vinay Pandey, learned P.L). lealrned Learned counsel appearingfor cjrder dated 9 October 2006 passed J473/2006 (RakeshKumar Sharma ai ^nd others) and in Writ Petition (S) }tate of Chhattisgarh and others) s|imilarly situated, therefore, the sjmila The case of the petitioner is leacher in the School Education t|vo years with the fixed salary. Howel y]ears' probation, the petitioner was r4 r^gular pay scale. Other similarly s|i 4dministrative Tribunal, Jabalpur for Mbunal vide order dated 24.8.19921 n|iade several representations to acco( =hi<ilci<fl-i tii4cfTfftel^t<Rit<i< ^.srf^iTsn^r for the petitioner. for the State/respondent. !26/227 of the Constitution of India, respondents to pay the increments of his initial appointment in the light State Administrative Tribunal, |the petitioner placed reliance on the |by this Court in Writ Petition (S) No. |id another Vs. State of Chhattisgarh ^o. 5474/2006 (Jai Nath Bajpai Vs. ^nd submits that the petitioner is order may be passed. ^hat he was appointed as Assistant Deplartment on probation for a period of 1/er, later on, after completion of two r^gularized but, he was not given the slituated teachers moved the State Iregular pay-scale, wherein learned allowed the same. The petitioner accolrd the same treatment as he is also :.o. XI-HC-78 *11*1WI ShH\«tl 3:s? ^ipncpr, SFiftwre, Rioi'yy •W.'. J.:. .to-b «AV. 1. P.l 200 3<iS<i T:i^T (sc^3^?) sn^rq^R-fi* asirsn^Tsbtti* -^L^. ^•' STciTWBflwsn^T similarly situated, but, the respond petition. 4. Learned counsel for the pe]titioner be allowed to make a representa(ion treatment to the petitioner and sanr|e to other similarty sifuated teachert Administrative Tribunal dated 24.81. respondent/State has no objection^ submits that the petitioner may to respondent No.1 to give similar e pay-scale which has been sanctioned on account of ttie order of the State .1992, to which learned counsel for the 5. Having heard learned coun^el the faets and cireumstances of th4 limited prayer made by learned c^ reasonable. Therefore, the petition| within a period of two weeks from grievances and, in turn, resp4ndent representation in an objective mar|ner date of receipt of such represenf: raised by the petitioner and takingl passed by the leamed State Admir^istrative No. 2745/1989. 7. Certified copy as per rules. chllfcl'ifl-l WRTt ^ fg^<Rl<-;K ^; •33[f^ir sn^T nte have not paid any heed. Thus, this for the parties and having regard to case, in the opinion of this Court, the >unsel for fte petitioner appears to be er is allowed to make a representation ioday to respondent No.1, raising all his No.1 shall decide the said within a period of 30 days from the tation, after considering all the points infc) account the order dated 24.8.1992 Tribunal in Original Apptication 6. The writ petition is accor<|lingly disposed of with the aforesaid direction. No order as to costs. Sd/- Dhirednra Mishra Judge