.< <A\^w.-^ i):-:-"" .../••" ...s^'^ ^>^Bl' Cr^^ ^•^s^ c (00 ^' IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATriSGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER RESPONDENTS W.P. (Sl N0. 1^30 b /2011 Arvind Kumar Tiwari S/o Shri Narmadanand Tiwari, aged about 52 years, Occupation Service, Posted as Head master, Primary School Tulsaghat, Block Lormi, District Bilaspur C.G. VERSUS 1. State of C.G. through the Secretary School Education Department , DKS Bhawan Raipur, C.G. ^2.The District Education Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur C.,G. ^-3. The Joint Director Treasury and Pension, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur C.G. .WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUE OF AN APPROPRIATE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS/CERTIORARI ETC. OR DIRECTION/ORDER IN THE LIKE NATURE ETC. MAY THIS PLEASE TO YOUR LORDSHIP, The humble petitioner named above most respectfully showed: .1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONERS. As mentioned in the cause title. 2. PARTICULARS OFTHERESPONDENTS. As mentioned in the cause title. S.'PARTICULARS OF THE ORDER AGAINST WHICH THE PETITION IS BEING MADE: ^-" ^l B« HIGH COURT QF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR • Vifw^- • PETITIONER RESPONDBNTS W.P.fSl.NO. 6300/2011 Arviad KiiiaarTiwari versus StateofC.G.&Others Shri Rakesh Paadey, counsel for fhe petitioner. Shri A.V. Shiidhar, P.L. for the Stats, ORDER eat.io.2011) Grievance of the petitioner in the present petition is that fhe petitioner was appointed as Deputy Teacher on a fixed pay scaie of Rs. 150 for a period of two years and after comLpletion of probation, he was graated regiilar pay scale ofRs. 169-300. Contention ofthe couiisel fcr the petitioner is fhat he is entifled for regular pay scale wifh efiFect froiu the date of initial appoiatnient and his case is squarely covered with number ofdecisioas passed by this Court aud also fhe judgment rendered t>y the M.P. State Admiaistrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A. No. 274S/89 (Bfadfcufeanf Yadv. &S6 Others Vs. State ofM.P. Se Othersfwheie iu it has been held that sinularly placed teachers are entitied for regular pay scale from. the date of their iaitial appoiutmeat. It is itot disputed by both fhe parties that the matter was taken up by fhe 'State to the Apex Court but fhe appeal was also disinissed by fhe Apex Court upholding the decision ofthe Tribunal to fhe effect fhat the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitled for regular pay scale froni fbe date offheir initial appointnient In view of the above subiiussioh made by fhe coimsel for the parties, fhe petition is disposed of in the same tenns i.e. the petitioner is graated Hberty to inake a representation, if so advised, in .,.f.t<S3!S^.t. !>(&• ^»JJ "V.^a"' .'.^"' ^ flie l^ht of the aforcsaid judgment and the circular dated 5.1.2011 (Aiuiexure P/ 2 ) aad in. tum, the concemed respondent is directed to consMer his case on its owa nierits aad ia its perspective. If fhe petitioner stands on fhe satae footmg as per order passed by the State Administrative Tribunal ia Madhiikaut Yadu (supra) and subsequentty confinned by the Supreiae Court ia Special Leave Petition (Civil) N0. 6892/93 by order dated 03.01.95, the petitioner may be entitled to sam.e reUefaccordiu.gly. It is expected froin fhe State aufhorities to pass suitable order aftier due scrutmy of the facts. It is inade clear fhat this court has not expressed aay opinion on fhe m.erits of the case aad the aufhority coucemed would be at Uberty to decide fhe representation staicfly ia accordance wiftt law. _ - PtU^er^akar Judge