CD IN THE HON‘BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGAN—l AT BILA’SPUR (6.6.) W.P.,,(S) NO. gé K3 /2011 PETITIONER // Da‘ra Ram Banjar'e, Aged abouT 56 year's, S/o La‘re Bhglar‘am Banjar'e, " Head MasTer', Governmem‘ Middle .. '. School Block Pamgcr‘h, V WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA $§u¢g;%_ _ é§f$w\\,.\\ Disf‘r. Janjgih-Champa (C.G.) $9.»;ctfF :\(>( Qiéfiw-‘w \ . VERsus §¢9RESPONDENTS : /1 Sfm‘e of Chha’rfisgar‘h i Through Secre’rary, Schoo! Educafion Departmen‘r e D.K‘S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) W2. The Director Public Insfrucfions Raipur' (C6,) 3. Djs’rr‘ic’r Education Officer Janjgir-Chompa (6.6.) /~4. Joinf Direcfor‘, Treasury, accoum‘s, pension, Janjgir-Champa (C.6.) others v. State of MP. & others), v teachers are entitled to regular pay appointment The matter was taken Leave Petition (Civii) No.6892/93. Th Supreme Court, uphoiding the decis Teachers/Assistant Teachers are ent initial appointment. Learned counsel appearing for while considering the same issue Chhattisgarh & Others [VV.P.(S) N allowed the petitioners to make a r presentation within a period of ten days, raising ali their grievances and in tur the concerned respondent was directed to herein, it was held that the similarly situated scale with effect from the date of initial .ip to the Hon‘bie Supreme Court in special a said petition was dismissed by the Hon‘ble ion of the Tribunal to the effect that the rtled to regular pay scale from the date of the petitioner further submits that this Court, n Amar Sai Ram & Others v. State of ,4725/2006] by order dated 01/09/2006, prim, W—Fsmo—z/zoi 1~1 ,so,ooo. mmmim‘ wmm mmm WW ®®W a; aifm 31m? SB : Hon’bie Shri Manindra fviohan :Shrivastava, J. 05-07-2011 Shri K.S.Pawar, counsel for the petitioner. Shri N. Naha Roy) Panel Lawyer for the Siate. W'rr‘h the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally The petitioner is appointed on a fixed pay of Rs.150/—. After successfully completing the probation period of 2 years, he was granted regular pay scale. Learned counsel appearing ior the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the case is as to whether, the petitioner is entitled to regular pay scale with effect from the date of initial appointment or after compietion of probation period. The issue involved herein was considered by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in U.A.No.2745189 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 decide the representation in an objecti the date of receipt of the representatior , Learned counsel for the petition r further submits that now the State Govt has issued an order on 5/01/2011 (Ahexure P/2) wherein, it has been ordered that those who have been appointed t are entitled to regular pay scale fr< successful completion of two years per Accordingly, the petitioner is l raising all his grievances, in light ofi 05/01/2011, and in turn, the concerr representation, if any, in accordance w three months from the date of receipt t of the facts, ln view ofthe foregoing, this pet ve manner within a period of 30 days from )efore 1082 and after 1995 on a fixed pay, )m the date of initial appointment upon od of probation. ;ranted liberty to make a representation he aforesaid judgment and circular dated ied respondent is directed to decide the th law, on its own merits, within a period of )f the representation, subject to verification tion is disposed of. No order as to costs Sd/— Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge mmw, Wris—FS/Mo—z/zoi 1~—1 ,so,ooo. £6; . WW».....3WIN m 200 whimW m1mm amm (Wm Wmm ,. , WWW Wm o? a: aif‘awm