%<N{l!.E BENi ^J-^'^^-:" erfs~; s IN THE HON'BLE HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR wPiS)NO. ^'^2-"^/201Q PETETCONERS RESPONDENTS l^..' . If^ ^.o..;^^/ ^ ^ 1. Murari Lal Rathore, S/o Janak Ram Rathore, aged about 56 years, Headmaster, 6ovt. Primary School Kurda, Block- Sakti, Distt. Janjgir'- Champa (C.6.) ^2. Thanuram Dhn'tlahre, S/o Jhagaru Ram, aged about 55 years, Headmaster, Govt. Primary School, Junwani, Block- Sakti, Distt. Janjgir- Champa (C.6.) VERSUS : 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through :- The Secretary, Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.6.) 2. District Education Officer, Distt. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 3. Block Education Officer, Sakti, bistt. Jangir-Champa (C.6.) 4. Joint Director, Treasury, Account & Pension, Bilaspur, Distt.-Bilaspur (C.6.) n-i £ z- WRIT PETITCON UNbER ARTCCLE 226 OF THE CONSTCTUTTON OF INDIA. ss^^^ HIGH GOURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Sinale Bench: Hon'ble ShriJustice Prashant Kumar Mishra Writ Petition (S.) No.7722 of 201 O Petitioners Respondents versus Murari Lal Rathore and another State of Chhattisgarh and others Present: Shri A.S.Rajput, counsel forthe petitioners. Shri N. Naha Roy, Panel Lawyerforthe State/respondents. Writ Petition under Art[cje_226 ofthe Constitution of India ORAL ORDER >th (Passed on 28L" January, 2011) Heard. 2. The petitioners were initially appointed on a fixed pay of Rs.100/- and Rs.150/-. After completion ofthe probation period, the petitioners were granted regular pay scale. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the issue involved in the case is as to whether the petitioners are entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment or after completion of probation period. 4. The issue involved herein was considered by the Madhya Prg.desh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A. No.2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 others vs. State of M.P. and others), wherein it was held that the similarly situated teachers were entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment. The matter sr SjS^ Mi^l ^sl ^•s:"^,. was taken up to the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6892/93. The said petition was dismissed by the Supreme Court upholding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitled to regular pay scale from date of initial appointment. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners also submits that this Court, while considering the same issue in Amar Sai Ram and others vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others [W.P.(S.) No.4725/2006] by order dated 1-9-2006, allowed the petitioner to make a representation within a period of ten days, raising all their grlevances. 6. Accordingly, the petitioners are granted liberty to make a representation raising all the grievances and in turn, the concerned respondent is directed to decide the representation, if any, in accordance with law and the aforestated decisions, on its own merits, within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of the representation, subject to verification of the facts. 7. In view of the foregoing, this writ petition is disposed of. -fc Gopal Sd//- prashantKumarMishra Judge