g@MME $EWM & @ €f\®?~. 1N THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR w P (S) Nof‘flcll“ OF 2010 PETITIONER :/ Punit Ram Taram, S / o. late Shri Duryodhan Taram, aged about 56 years, Head Master, Govt. Primary School Shitalapara — Tanshi, Block— Kan‘ker, District Kanker ‘ (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, 'D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C. G.) RESPONDENTS x: ’1'. ssistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Kanker, District Kanker (C. G.) Block Education Officer, Kanker, District Kanker (C.G.) L " 4. Treasury Offlcer, Treasury Account and Pension, Kanker, District Kanker (C. G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA / A 0/1? WWWW mm...> M Sagt g Wm (Wu) Shri Somkant Velma, counsei for the pefiu'oner. Shri Vaibhav Goverdhan, PL. for th€ State. Grievance of tha petitioners in the present petition is that in the year 1976, he was appointed as Dy, Teacher on a flxed pay scale of Rs. 100-150 for a granted regular pay scale of Rs. 169-300. period of two years and after compleu'on of probation, he was Contenu'on of the counse for the petitioner is that he is entitled for regular pay scale wi ehect fmm the date of initial appointment and his case is s arely covered with number of decisions passed by this Court ’ by the ‘VI P State Admmistrativ Tribunal Jabalpur 1n 0.A. No. 2745189 (Madhukant Yadu & 6 Others Vs. $tate of M.P. as Others) wherein it has been. hel that similarly placed teachers are entitled for regular pay sc e from the date of their initial appointment. d also the Judgment rendexed It is not disputed by both the parties that the matter was taken u}; by the State to the Apex Court but the appeal was also dismissed by the Apex Court Tribunal to the effect that the T eachers/ Assistant Teachers are from the date of their initial upholding the decision of the entitled for regular pay scale appointment. ’ mam ammm mats?!m mwa’wm a aifawmérr SB : HON’BLE MR. JUST! 20.19.2010 XI—HC—78 g\ Wm IJP.0A.§..i (”20° .mmw mmm WW§wm %aifaua11é§1 mm (Wu) Ram-(mm in VIEW OI me above $11 SSIOH i the partie$, the petition is dispo 6d of in the same terms i.e. the petitioner is granted liberty to make a represexuation, if so advised, in the light of the afoxe aid judgment and fhe circular dated 27.12.2008 (Annexure P/ ) and in tum, the concerned respondent is directed to consid ,r their case on its own merits and in its perspective. If the Titioner stand on the same footing as per order passed b State Administrate Tn'bunal in Madhukant Yadu (supra) and subsequently confirmed by the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 6892/ 93 by order dated 3.1.1995, the petit oner may be entitled to same relief accordingly. It is expected from the s te authorities to pass suitable order after due scrutinv of the Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge e y e f 5