HIGHCXMJBTOFCHHATTISGARHAT mLASPUR Wi&Petii^fSjjNu.StWAQO^ PETTTTQNERS : 1. Milwant Ram Sahu, S/o Late Shri Somnath Sahu, aged about 50 Yr. (Teacher) R/o Village Post Aamdi Tali & Kstt. Dbamtari (CG). 2. Bhupal Ram Matstiyaial S/o Late Shri Sonau Ram Matshypal aged about 50 years occupation (Asstt. Teacher) R/o Imgation Colony Rudhri Qtr.NO. A/63Dhamtari. 3. Krishna Kumar Verma, Sfo Hari Ram Verma, age3 about47 years, R/o Devari District Raipur (CG). 4. Vinod Kumar Gupta S/o Ramanand Gupta aged about 47 years R/o Post Rajim, Tah Gariyabandh DistrictRaipur (CG). 5. Handrik S/o Prashanna Kumar Lahre, aged about47 years R/o Nagpura P.0. Chandkhiiri Block Arahg Distt.Raipur. VERSUS • : i RESPONDENT8 : 1, State ofChhattisgarh, through Sepretaiy, Education & TribalDepartment, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CQ). 2. District Education Officer, District Dhamteri (CG). 3. Block Education Officer, Block Dhamtari/Kurud. (WWT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE eONSTTTUTION OF DslDIA) (SB: Httn'bleMr.SatishK.Affldhotei.J.') Present : 8mt.RenuKochar,Advocateforthepetitioners. , SfariM-P.S. Bhafia, Deputy Govt Advocateforthe State/respondents. ORALORDER (Passed onl9nldayofJune,2008) With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for hearing finally. 1. The petitioners were appointed as Assistaat Teachers on fixed pay of P.s. 1200/-. After completion oftwo years of probation peiiod, tliey were granted regular pay scale. Leamed counsel appearing fbrithe / petitioners subinits thattfae issue myolved in the case is asto whether, the petitioners are eutitled to regular pay scale w.e.£ the datie mitial appomtmentoraftercofflpletiotipfprobatioriperiod. Sahu 2. The issue mvolved, herein wasconsidered bythe MadhyaPradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpurin O.A. No. 2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 others Vs. State ofM.P. & others), wherein it was held tfaat the similarly situated teachers are eirtitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment. Tlie matter was teken up to Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special LeavePetition (Civil)No. 6892/93. The said petition was dismissed by tfae Hon'ble Supreme Court upholding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitled to regiilar pay scale from date ofinitial appointment. 3. In view ofthe above stated submissions made by leamed counsel for the parties, the ^Tit petition is disposed of in the same temis i.e. the petitioners are granted liberty to make a representatioii, if so advised, to consider their case, ifthey stahd on tiie same footmgs as per order dated 24.08.1992 by the Madhya Pra^esh State A-dmmistrative Tribunal, Jabalpur, in O.A. No. 2745 of 89 MadhuKant Yadn (supra) sead subseqiientiy confinned by order dated 03.01.1994 passed by the Hpn'bleSupreme Court in Special LeavePetition (Civil) No. 6892/93 and grant relief accordingly. 4. In view ofthe foregoing, this petition is disposed of. No order asto costs. '^!—-m Sd/- • Satish K. Agmhotri