@@ lN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICA$URE AT BILASPUR gCEHATTISGgggl WIT PETITION No. OF aQQé //Smt.Asha Singh, wife of Shri B.K.Singh, aged about k2 years, resident of Pandariya, presently posted at Government Higher Secondary School, Pandariya, Dist: Kabirdham (C.G) EETXTIONER :- Vs. "1. State of Ghhattisgarh:through: Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.Bhawan, Baipur (C.G). RESPONBENTS _.- w I/2. District Educational Officer, Dist: Kabirdham (C.G) /3. Block Education Officer, Block: Pandari&a, Dist: Kabirdham (C.G). ERIT PETgilON UNDER ARTICLE 2ég/227 OF THE CQESTITUTION OF 1NDIA XI—HC'78 saw,m, WP o.o..o.o¢ooo o WW W NV 3 'gxigeqa 200 WW(W) mmém WWW Sumesh Bajaj, respondents/State on advance cop The main grievance raised l the petiticner is nat being given th to the similarly situated teachers. By this petition the petit respondent authorities to treat the similarly situated teachers as far Claims and other allowance are co that she was appointed as Assistal 1) and presently she is Working Pandariya, District Kabirdhani, St. of two years and allowed to draw her appointment letter it was me; annual increment on completion of probation period, the petitioner’s si dated 1719‘ 1995 (Annexure 13—2)‘ Six not getting the benefits in aooo ' mentiened in the appointment 0rd matwm WW§1E¢TW awfrwm Heard Dr. Shailesh Abuja, A Shri oner prays for a direction to the case of the petitioner at par with the as the regular pay scale, benefits, icemed. The case of the petitioner is it Teacher on 17.9, 1993 (Annexure P- ; in the Higher Secondary School, e was kept on probation for a period :he pay scale of Rs.1400-2640/-. In itioned that she will be entitied for one year service. Ai‘ter completion of 3Wices were regularized under order- nilarly situated teachers aggrieved by “dance with terms and conditions No, 1890/ O8 stating that during the er filed a Writ petition bearing WP. paid the allowances like D.A,, H benefits as per revised seheme of 1 64.2005 directed the respondents tr The petitioner herein also submitté thereafter on 2452006 but so far n 3f respondents, l have heard learned counsei f —\ dvooate for the petitionert Government Advocate for the Y- )y the petitioner in this petition is that e similar treatment as has been given probation period they were not being RA, annual increments and other . 997 and this Court vide order dated i consider the case of the petitioners. d representation on 13.4.2006 and othing has been heard from the side 3r the parties. P.T.O. XI—HC-78 3a W, m, W3? o o...‘....o~oooooooo.o mm (W) 3 )’