^ ^•f;-^-^;;-^••'-^•^'-^-^•^Szgs. S^te'St^l^t®® IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) WRIT PETITION No. ^fLI /2004 PETITIONERS ^ 1. Tirathram Sinha, Aged about 46 years, S/o Manluram Sinha, .^'A<^ R/° Krishna Nagar, Shya "' )y!^ Chowk. Bhilai.Drstt. m Chowk, Bhilai,Distt. Durg (C.G.) '^' t^;"- ^-<" • ^< ^•/'..^^* yy-^^"' 2- Namdas Nagwanshi, ^<yy'~\ Aged about 48 years, RESPONDENTS S/o Matruji Nagwanshi, R/o Krishna Nagar, Balaji Chowk, Supela Shilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) 3. Bahchorlal Koshare, Aged about 40 years, S/o Late Punuram Koshare, R/o Station Maroda, Utai Road, Bhilai,Distt. Durg (C.G.) VERSUS 1. Municipal Corporation through its Commissioner, Bhilai, Distt. Durg 2. The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Bhilai Distt. Durg. 3. The State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Urban Administration and Development Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF XNDIA ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION No. 2614 of2004 PETmONERS RESPONDENTS Tirathi'am Sinha & Others. VERSUS Municipal Corporation & others. Amit WKFT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTTRmON OF JND1A SB: Hon'ble Shn Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shri Parag Kotecha, Advocate for the petitioners. Sliri H.BAgrawal, Scmor Advocate with Shri Paiikaj Agrawal, Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2. Smt. Smita Ghai, Panel La^yer forthe State/respondent No. 3. QRDER(C»IAD (Passed on 16U1 day of September, 2009) 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that by order dated 15th December, 2000 (.A.nnexure P/l) the petitioners were gi'anted regular appointment and posted for a period oftwo years on probation, wherein specific pay-scale was mentioned. Thereafter, an order was passed on 20 December, 2000 (Armexure P /3) whereby the pay scale as mentioned in the order datsd 15 December, 2000 (Amexure P/l) was not granted to the petitioners, but was kept under detei'mmation. 2. Leamed counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submits that the process of detemiination of grant of regular pay scale is under consideration. 3, Be that as it may, ifthe resporidents 1 and 2 have varied salaiy or pay scale after graiit ofpay scale vide order dated 15 December, 2000 (Annexure P/l). that caimot be doxie without affordiiig an opportunity ofhearing to the petitioners. However, at this stage, the Court will not interfere with the decision of the employer. The respondents 1 and 2 are directed to take imniediate decision having regard to the order dated 15th December, 2000 and 20th December, 2000 (Annexiire P/3) and determme the proper pay scale ofthe petitioners and make paymentthereofatthe eariiest. 4. With the above directions, the petitioii is disposed of Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge