OF -1.4T aN< Pe+iti rsTt i^-W ^nys3rn& Versus in'y i4rjun La! Patei S/o Shr's Ptirushottam Patel, Aged about 47 years, Asslstant Teacher Tribal Weifor'e (Aashrcin) Primiry Schooi Pindri Btock Saranqor-h C-istt. ftaigarh [C.fe] 1, •^. ^^ ^*^1 •^. ^s ^fN }<rh Throigh;- Secretary Tribal Devetopment, &.K.S.6hwa I, 2. Tne Director, Pub'ic instruction, &..K.S- Bhowcn, Raipur (C.ft) • 3. Joint .Director, Public [.nstruction bivision, Raigar'h (C.fi.) 4. Commteswne," Tribd bweiopment Raigarh (C.G.) 5. bistricf Education O [C.6.1: 6. Btock EducationQfficer bistt. .A 1 !8;U/ •n'ble ,Vu-. Justice Satii pregent". Mr. SaniayPatei, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. VInay Pondey, Panel Lawyer for-State/r-espondenl (Passed on this 19" tioy of March. 2007 1. Tne petitionec was vide or-der- 8.10.1986 as i4 Teacher (t-eputy Teocher) on fixed pay scals of R of one year profaQtion.hs was gr'anted r-egutar ?/'-, After 07B-1 AKf),'. f y^.'3^v/ ". i4 '.. Leorned counsel for the petitione". submits that the issue invoived in the ccse is oato whether, the petttioner is sntitted to regula' w.e.f. the of Initiui oppointment o" from the date of ,-fl compieTion ot probotjon penoa'. 3. Tne issue involved, herein conaidered by the Madhya Pradedi State Administrative Tribunal, Jabolpu" in O.A. . 2745/89 (Mcdhukmt Yadu and 56 others Vs. Stats of M.P. <& other-s), it was he'id Thut the Hmilar'^y· Situoted teachers are entitted to "egutor pay scale w.e.f. ths of initiat appointtBent. The mattsr taken-up to the Hon bie Sypreme Cout-t In Leave Petition (CsviO No. 6892/93. The saii t^^^^^'^^fs-.Sf^ ^S.JaSS^ ^3|? ^Efl^S l.t^^'EjS^i^ S=S^ ? ~^^^ -^ s_i3^^-3M^ 3-^^ J:3 t^' p^TITiQft WSS SiSf^lSSeS oy TflS MOH ^1© ^?U| A|. uwioiaing Tne ^ dscision of the Tribunai' to the effect that the Teachers,/Assistont Tsachers -a*e. entitled to ('egular p<y froffi date of initi >pointment. 4. Learned appeoring for The petitioner further submits thot thii Court, while considering the issue in Su^il! Tww'i & Vs i't. of Chhattfsqorih & other-s (W.P. (S) No. of by- ordsf 7-11-2006. hos granfed regulor poy w.e.f. the o1 initial o&Bointment 5. Learned appeariry for the pdrties joint!y submit that thls is squ<a"ety covered by the decision of this Court in the of Sushii Tiwari a others Vs. State iSovt. of Chha+ti^aph & others (Supra). >. In vtew of that this petitlon is in the some terms. No order as to costs. Sd/- ^ SatishKAgnitiotri .Jydge •;; ,