WRIT PETI'IION UNDER ARUCLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA QO HIGH COEIRT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BELASPUR SB : HON’BLE MR. J‘GSTECE 9RH‘INKER DIWAKER w.p.gsy.No. 6372/2011 PE’E‘ETIONER Shatrughan Ptasad Verma VEI‘SHS RESPGNDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Others Shn' K.S.Pa.war, counSel for ths petitioner. Shri Shashank Thakur, Pm far the Stave. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTECLE 225 OF THE CONSTETUTEO?! OF INDEA ORDER {21.11.2011) Gn'evance of the petitioner in the yresent petition is that the pefitioher was appointed in the year 1976 as Deputy Teacher on a flxed pay scale of Rs. 100 for a period Of one year and Thereafter in the year 1977 on a fixed payv scale of Rs. 150 for a period of one year. After completion of probation, in the year 1978, he was granted regular pay scale of Rs. 169—300. Contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that he is entitled for regular pay scale with effect from the date of initial appointment and his case is squarely covered with number of decisions passed by this Court and also the judgment rendered by the M.P. State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A. No. 2745/89 Mfadhukant Yadu & 56 Others Vs. State ofMZP. &. Others) where in it has been held that similarly placed teachers are entitled for regular pay scale from the date of their initial appointment. It is not disputed by both the parties that the matter was taken up by the State to the Apex Court but the appeal was also dismissed by the Apex Cohrt upholding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitled for regular pay scale from/ the date of their initial appointment. @ 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 representation, if so advised, in the light of the aforesaid judgment and the circular dated 5.1.2011 (Annexure P/ 2 ) and in turn, the concerned respondent is directed to consider his case on its own merits and in its perspective. if the petitioner stands on the same footing as per order passed by the State Administrative Tribunal in' Madhukant Yadu (supra) and subsequently confirmed by the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) NO. 6892193 by order dated 03.01.95, the petitioner may be entitled to same relief accordingly. It is expected from the State authorities to pass suitable order after due scrutiny of the facts. It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the authority concerned would be at liberty to decide the representation strictly in accordance with law, Sd/— Pritinker Eiwakar Judge