&.p^^% HON'BLE S. B. IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONERS: ^. w^ I'N ^y/^ ^'/./ '•^-^ RESPONDENTS: 1. 2. 3. WRIT PETITION fSI No. / 2011 Smt Bhagyawati Nag, W/o Shri Meghnath Nag, Aged about 57 years, Post-Head Master, Posted at Primary School Khutguda, Bodanpal, R/o Teachers Colony, Bhanpuri, Village & Post Bhanpuri, District Bastar, C.G. Chandrasen Netam, S/o Late Shri Tangru Ram Netam, Aged about 58 years, Post- Head Master, Posted at Middle School Jugani, R/o ^Village & Post Jugani, District Bastar, C.G. Samlu Ram Mourya, S/o Late Shri Dudhnath Mourya, Aged about 57 years, Po5t- Head Master, Posted at Middle School Borchepdapara, Kumhali, R/o Ranigudapara Bhanpuri, Village &. Post Bhanpuri, District Bastar, C.G. Punau Ram Kashyap, S/o Shri Nadiram \ Kashyap, Aged about 55 years, Post- hlead /' Master, Posted at Primary School Padarpara, R/o Village Farsaguda, District Bastar, C.G. i./ Kamlesh Kumar Nag, S/o Shri Manglu Ram Nag, Aged about 56 years, Post Head Master, Posted at Middle School Patwaripara, Block Baderajpur Vishrampuri, R/o Village Batrali, Tehsil Keshkal, District Bastar, C.G., VERSUS ? <-'" 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department ofTribal Welfare, Ministry, D.K.S. L'L'ilding, Raipur, C.G. ^ 2. The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, C.G. «• 3. The District Education Officer, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, C.G. WR1T PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA The petitioners named above beg to submit is under:- '-ciQiMERS ^ .t...-''-"'^-;^3^,. .,i^<.a.^ "•^\ ';?'S®1?*. B •'te.^f HIGH COURT OF CHHATT: Versus SiQ.t. Bhagvawati Nag & Others State of Chliattisgarh & Others Shri Alolc DCTvangaa, coiinsel tbr the petitioners. Shri N.Naiia Roy, P.L. for the State. Grievance of fbe petitioners in the present petition is fhat the petitioners were appoiated as Assistaat Teachers on a fixed pay scale of Rs. 100-150 aad after coinpletion ofprobation, fhey were graiited regiu.ar pay scale ofRs. 169-300. Contention of fhe counsel for fbe petitioncrs are tbat they are entitled for regular pay scale with effec'Ei.froni the date of isiitial apporatiuent and fheir case is squarely covered witb. auinber of decisions passed by tbis Court and also fhe judginent. rendered by the M.P. State Adinuiistrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A. OfhersJ wliere in it has been held fhat siiniiarly placed teachers are entitled for regular pay scale from. fiie date of tlieir initial appom.tatent. It is not disputed by both fbe parti.es that tlie inatter was taken 'iip by the State to tlie Apex Coiut but tbe appeal was also disniissed by fbe Apex Court upholdiag fhe decision of the Tribunal to the efi'ect fh.at the TeacIiers/Assistaat Teachers are entitled for regular pay scale froia fhe date of their initial appouitaient. In view of the above su'bniission inade bv the counsel for the parties, fhe petitioa is disposed of ui the same tertus i.e. the ff S ? II %- petitioners are graated Uberft' to niake a representation, if so advised, io. the light offhe aforesaid judgnient and the circillar dated 27.12.08 (Annexure P/5) aad in tum, fh.e conceraed respondent is directed to consider fheir case on its own Dierits and ia its perspective. If fbe petitioners stand on fb.e same footing as per order passed by fhe Sta.tc Adininistrative Tribunal ia Madhukant Yadu (supra) and subsequently confirDied by the Suprenie Coiu-t iu Special Lea.ve Petition (Civil) N0. 6892/93 by order dated 03.01.95, the petitioners inav be entifled to same relief accordiaglv. It is expected froni fhe State authorities to pass suitable order after due scnitmv offhe facts. !t is niade clear that this court has not expressed any opmioa on the nierits of the case aud. the authority coccemed would be at Uberty to decide tfie representation strictly ia accordance with law. Sd/- Pritinker Diwakei -hidge