IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH w.P.(S) No. 5785’ 12006 PETITIONER Smt. Vaneeta Chandrakar, ‘ " W/o. Shri Ashok Kumar Chandrakar, 0/0\ “ME- "' Aged about — 40 yrs., Assistant Teacher Primary School, ‘ \ w. Kusumkasa, Block _ Dondi Dis“. - DU’Q (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS /1. State of Chhattisgrh, Through — The Secretary Department of Education/ T.W.D. D.K.s. Bhawan, Raipur i (C.G.) 4, cog Q2\M v /2. Commissioner Tribal Welfare Department, Raipur Chhattisgarh 3. AssistantCommissioner Tribal Welfare Department, District — Durg (C.G.) OV gs“ t¢ ‘ /\ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA for ISSUANCE OF SUITABLE WRITt E r \- WRITS DIRECTION ETC. TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER. Present : . Mr Aml Smgh Rajput caunsel for the petitioners m ail the petitions Mr Utkarsh Verma Deputy Government Advocate for the respondents/State m ail the petmons ORDER (Passea on 27‘ of October, 2006) By this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution v of indie; the petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to pay the increments and seniority on the basis of the date of their initial appointment in the iight of the decision rendered by the teamed State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in Original Application No.1452 of 1998 (Harish Chand Singh and others vs. State of MP. and others) dated 31 4-2000, Original Application No.802 of 1998 (Akhilesh Mishra and others vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others) and Original Application No.991 of 1998 (Ramayan Prasad Dwivedi and others vs. State of MP. and others). '3 . Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners placed on record a copy of the order dated 12-10—2006 passed by this Court in Writ Petition (8.) No.5593 of 2006 (Smt. Asha Ekka (now kaushik) and another vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others) and submits that the ’ petitioners are similariy situated therefore, the similar order may be passed. 3. The present writ petitions. being Writ Petitions (5.) No.5762 of 2006, 5784 of 2006, 5785 of 2006 and 5814 of 2006 involve , similar facts and éommon question of iaw. Thus, these-petitions are being disposed of by this common order. 4. as Teacher in the School Education Department on probation for a period of two years with the fixed saiary. However, later on, after completion of two years’ probation. the petitioners were regularized, but. they were not given the regular pay-scale. Other similarly situated teachersmoved the State Administrative Tribunal. Jabalpur for regular pay-scale. wherein learned Tribunal, vide order dated 31-1-2000, allowed the same. The petitioners made several representations to accord the same treatment as they are also similariy situated teacher, but, the respondents have not paid any heed. Thus, this petition . The cases of the petitioners are that they were appointed 5. petitioners may be allowed to make a representation to respondent No.1 to give similar treatment to the petitioners and the same pay—scale which .has been sanctioned to other similarly situated teachers on account of the order of the State Administrative Tribunal dated 31-1— 2000. to which learned counsel for the respondentslState has no objection. Learned counsel for. the. petitioners submits that the 8. regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in the opinion of this Court, the iimited prayer made by learned counsel for the, petitioners appears to be reasonable. Therefore, the petitioners are allowed to make a representation within a period of two weeks from today to respondent No.1. raising all their grievances and. in turn. respondent Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having No.1 shali decide the said representation in an cbjective manner within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of such representation, after considering ail the points raised by the petitioners and taking into account the order dated 31-1-2000 passed by the teamed State Administrative Tribunal in Original Application No.1452 of.1998, and if the petitioners stand on the same footings, as the petitioner§ in the \ Original Application No.1452 of 1998, then they be also sanctioned the same pay-scale and seniority‘ 7. The writ petitions are accordingiy disposed of with the aforesaid direction. No order as to costs. 8. A copy of this order be placed on‘the record of the connected writ petitions. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Gopal i