BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P (S) No. \0.>\ of2o11 PETITIONER / : Hemlal Chaturvedi, aged about 63 years, S/o Late Shri Ram Prasad Chaturvedi, Retired Teacher, R/o Village & Post-Bholapur, Block- 1, Chhuriya, District-Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS t 3. Block Education Officer, Block- / Chhuriya, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. W "gnha 3.. r: F gm CD V? W oaagix RESPONDENTS :1. /, State of Chhattisgarh, Through : the Secretary, Department of School § Education, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) /2. District Education Officer, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon t (C.G-) HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 191 01‘2011 PETITIONER : Hemlal Chamrvedi. VERSUS RESPONDENTS 2 State ofChhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. AgnihotriLJ. Present: ‘Shri AQSahu, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Sushil Dubey, G.A for the State/respondents. ORDER g ORAL) (Passed on 14 day of January, 201 1) 1. The petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher on a fixed pay of Rs. 100/~. Atter completion of probation period, he was - granted regular pay scale. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the case is asto whether, the petitioner is entitled to regular pay scale we]? the date of initial appointment or after completion of probation period. 3. The issue involved, herein was considered by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in OA No. 2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 others Vs. State ofM.P. & others), wherein it was held that the similarly situated teachers are entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment. The matter was taken up to Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. \ 6892/93. The said petition was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme 2’? Court upholding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitled to regular pay scale §om date ‘ ofinitial appointment. . Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also submits that this court, while considering the same issue inAmar Sai Ram & others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others [W.P. (S) No. 4725/2006] by order dated 01.09.2006, allowed the petitioners to make a representation along with copy ofthe petition and annexures within a period of ten days, raising all their gievances and in tum the concerned respondent $ was directed to decide the representation in an objective manner within a period of 30 days dom the date of receipt of the representation. . Accordingly, the petitioner is granted liberty to make a representation raising all his gievances and in tum, the concerned respondent is directed to decide the representation, if any, in accordance with law, on its own merits, within a period of 8 weeks hom the date of receipt ofthe representation. . In view of the foregoing, this petition is disposed of. No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge