HEgH CCKIR‘F QF CHHAT’TISQ:&EH A“? :E‘ELégiUiQ Singie Banc%a : $4ar§$ia $9M Smé§ Kamm' $mha. Q”. Wrii' Pe‘ki?§ért¢No‘é$92 of 2m}? Pe?i?iomrs 1. Nanci Kumar Bandhe, age abou‘i‘ 4§ years, fiss‘h’r Teacher 3/0 Shr' Dawa! Dds Bandg‘xe 66v;;. Primary §chooi Maiidih Biock - Rmng, 3%??? - Eaipur (CG) 2. Upandm Kumar' Dashiahre, Age abcu'i‘ ‘ 42 ‘ year's] As’s‘ry‘. Tawney- S/$ 5hr§ Manmkhan La! bes’héahre §9W MiddSe School ?cmhada, Biock — Amng, Dis‘rr - Rcipur $6“) Ehagwan Singh $ahu Age abouf 47 years, 1455?? 'i'eacher‘ 5/0 aw. 5hr: Rama! Sahu éaV'i‘ Middie Schooi Fundhar- my? - Raipur {CGE 4. Ganesh Ram Miri, Age about 38 years Ass‘r‘? Teacher Sin 53m Hrm §am MEr§ $W? NRHdk Schooi Navagaon Eéock - Armg, bi??? - §éaipur {£6} Sumiwa Dhri'i'iahere, Age abou? 37 year's, Assfi' Teacher Wf'o $hré Hemum'm Dhri‘riahere, ViHage - Parsada, Pas? - é’ubund Bis?? - Raipur ((36) Versus Resnondenfs 1. Sfai‘e Gov‘l' 9f ChhafT§sgarh Though Secre‘mry Tribai We!fc\r-e Depar‘rmen? & Edaca‘rim Depar‘rmen‘? DKS B§mwam Disft Kanpur (L6) Z. Disfricf Educm‘ion Officer, Sis?!" - Qaipur‘ (CG) Wri'i' Pe?ifion Hinder ér‘i’icie 226 51‘ 1'ha ConsTHwdon o‘F "india \IV ‘P-C$> N§‘ é C ?2—/e}v , Z.“ Presaw '. $hri Somkam' Verma! caunsai fer i‘he pamoners. Ms Swim Jain, ‘Panei iawyer for ’a‘he 5mm. §R L §E3E§z {Paswd (3%“: 3E? wévembar, 269?) kéem‘d. Learned counsai far ’rhe pe‘ritioners submh‘s Thm" we issuz invowed in ‘fha case is as f0 whe‘r‘her The pe‘fi’riomrs are arm-tied 3’0 reguiar pay same w.e.f'. the dafe of ini‘ria‘! ugpoin‘men‘? or from We dnfe of comp§efian 9f probation period. He submifs fha‘? fhe issue ‘mvo'Wed herein was considered by ‘me Mad’i’aya Wedesh Sfaw Admini§rfdve Tribund, Jaim‘ipur in (1A. No.2745/89 {Madhukam Vadu (md 56 oThers Vs. S'm‘e of MP. & Of‘mrs}, wherein, if was held '‘xhct? 1‘he similarw'sifuafed feac'ners are entwed to rzguiar pay sccde we}. i‘he da‘te of 'miTiai appoimmem. The‘maf‘rer was foken ug: 1m ‘rhe Hon‘oie Supreme Cour? in Speciai Leave Pe‘?§1'ion {Ch/33) No. ‘é'f592/93. The said pe‘f‘n‘ion was d§smissed by fhe Hon'b’§e Supreme Cour‘r uphoiding *he decision of The Tribunei ’ro ‘rhe effec‘r The? The Teachers/Assisiani Teachers are en‘iiiied 1'0 reguior pay sceie from ihe cie'ie of ini‘i’ial appoin‘i'mem'. Learned counsei for fhe pe‘i‘i‘iioner‘s farther submiis i'im‘i' This Cow‘i. whiie considerisg ‘Fhe some issue in Rem Kumer 5am (”a Oiiwer's Vs. Sm‘m 60w of Chhafi‘isgur‘h (Si (mower iW.i"1.(S)No. 813 of 260% by order doieé 3.2.2.2GG7, has granied reguiar pay seaie wef. The d‘n‘ie of ini‘iisi appo'm‘i'mem. Leamed counsei for ’rhe par‘i'ies joie‘iiy sebmi'i’ the? ihis ease is squereiy covereé by The decisio’a of this Coum" in The ease of Ram Kama!” Sahu and anoi‘ner {Soot-a). in View of Thai, ihis pe‘riiion is eiiowed in The same ierms. Mowever, This order shaii be subject To eii verifice‘i’ions mode by The STeTe regaréing Tom‘s pieoded inMew Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge i \ i v i i pudma