81KIIS F RFWfil?'1 ?:fc S •';"•'? S'.iat^ t'- 'f.S 'S-. sV. ¥-ff&:l^ ? §it3^<fs^ cr IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fC.GI W.P. (S) N0. PETITIONERS :l ,.0^^.. ,^SS^:::-^2 ^^^•^" 2 at.®"' *.'y1 .-^^,^' '^ ^^'' I. 1<^^>! ^0'^' ^^ \^ <?/ APASNA V3 ,'»* ,T*.;' 6C1.8^ / 2006 Kaushal Prasad Patel Aged about 39 Years, S/o Shri Daduram Patel, Assistant Teacher, Govt. Primary School Kotmi, R/o Village Kirari, Tahsil Dabhra, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) Upendra Kumar Patel, Son of Shri Vasudev Prasad Ptel, aged about 39 years, Assistant Teacher Govt Primary School Kotmi, Resident of village Kirari, Tahsil Dabhra, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) Kaituram Kishore, Son of Sugreev Kishore, aged about 43 years, Assistant Teacher Govt. Primary School Bilaigarh, resident of Village Girgira, Tahsil Dabhara, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) RESPONDENTS 1 f 4. Dataram Patel, Son of Shri Brijmohan Patel, aged about 37 years, Assistant Teacher- Govt. Primary School Kanwali, resident of village Saraipali, Tahsil Dabhara, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) ,2; The Director Public Instruction Department Raipur (C.G.) 3.- District Education Officer Janjgir-Champa District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/-3S^ OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA ^ HIGH COURT OF OHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SINGLEBENCH : HON'BLE MR. SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI^J, WRIT PETITION (S.l N0.69S2 OF 20QS Petitioners Shubhash Chandra Verma and others versus ResDondents State of Chhattisgarh and others WRIT PETITION (S.l NO.S967 OF 2006 Petitioners Smt. Jyoteshwari Rao and ariother yersys Respondents Stete of Chhattisgarh and others WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.6968 OF 2006 .,*• Petitioners versus Respondents Kumari Rampyari Dheewar and another State of Chhattisgarh and another WRIT PETITtON (S.) N0.6989 OF 2006 Petitioner Dinesh Prasad Shanna versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and another WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.6970 OF 2006 Petjtioner Kamil Tirky versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and another i» WRITPETITION (S.) N0.6971 OF 2006 Petitioner Bal Chand Sahu versus Reseondents State of Chhattisgarh and others WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.69790F 2006 Petitipner Re^ondente versus Maniram Sahu State of Chhattisgarh and others WraT PETITION (S.l N0.6980 QUQOS Petitioners Pranadhar Lahare and others versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.6981 OF 2006 Petitioners Sunder Lal Sonwani and others versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others 3C Petitioners Respondents WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.69820F2006 Narottam Pate! and others yersys State of Chhattisgarh and others WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.6983 OF 2006 Petitioners Respondents versys Ramkrishna Sahu and othere State of Chhattisgarh and others WRIT PETITION (S.) N0.6984 OF 2006 Petitionere Respondents versys Kaushal Prasad Patel and others State of Chhattisgarh and others Petitioners Respondente WRILPETITION IS.1 N0.6985 OF 2006 Yogesh Patel and another versus State of Chhattisgarh and others Present : Mr. Anil Singh Rajput, Mr. A.N.Bhakta, Mr. O.P.Sahu and Mr. Anil Mourya, counsel for the petitioner(s). Mr. Arun Sao, Government Advocate and Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents. SB 4 <th ORDER (Passed on 14'" Day of December, 2006) By thls petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, 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 light of the decision rendered by the !earned State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in Original Application No.1452 of 1998 (Harisft Chand Singh and others vs. State of M.P. and ofhers) dated 31-1-2000, Original Application No.802 of 1998 (Akhilesh Mishra and ottTers vs. State of Madhya Practesh and offiers) and Original Application No.991 of 1998 (Ramayan Prasad Dwivedi and others vs. StateofM.P. and others). £- 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners placsd on record a copy ofthe order dated 3-10-2006 passed by this Court in Writ Petition (S.) No.5191 of 2006 (Har Prasad Kiirre and offwrs vs. State of ChhatSsgafti and others) and submit that the petitioners ars similarly situated, therefore, the similar order may be passed; 3. The present bateh of writ pet'rtions are being disposed of by this common order as the facts and question of law involved in these petitions are common. 4. The cases of the petitioners are that they were appointed as Teacher in the School Education Department on probation for a period of two years with the fixed salary. However, later on, after completion of two years' probation, the petitioners were regularized, ^- «" but, they were not given the regular pay-scale. Other simiiarly situated teachers moved 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 atso similariy situated teacher, but, the respondents have not paid any heed. Thus, this petition. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that Uie petitioners may be allowed to make a representation to respondent No.1 to give similar treatment to the petitioners and the same pay-scate which has been sanctioned to other similariy situated teachers on account of the order of the State Administrative Tribunal dated 31-1- 2000, to whwh leamed counse! appearing for the State/respondents have no objection. S. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in the opinion of this Court, fhe limited prayer made by leamed counsel for the petitioners appears to be reasonable. Therefore, the petitionere are allowed to make a representation within a period of two weeks from today to respondent No.1, raising all their grievances and, in tum, respondent No.1 shall decide the said representation in an objective manner within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of such representation, afterconsidering atl the points raised bythe petitioners and taking into account the order dated 31-1-2000 passed by the learned State Administrative Tribunal in Originat Application No.1452 of 1998, and if the petitioners stand on the same footings, as the petitioners in the Original Application No.1452 of 1998, then they be also sanctioned the same pay-scale and seniority. 7. The writ petitions are accordingly 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/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge Gopal -w