H%$H GQEAR‘F‘ OF JkiDRQATLéRE #5? EELA$PL§R: CEHATTE$GARH singia gench : Han’ble s'mri $aii$h K. égni§mi€£ J. W§ii Pe‘i‘iiiérx {33 $53. $§L§§ af 2G§$ Pet§€iener Puran La! Dewanqanl SIG. Shri Paras Ram Dewangan, aged abGu‘I 4O yaars, A$sistant Teaches“ (Science) Govt Hr Sec. SchooL Supela—Bhitai. Distt'.—Durg (CG) entitied to reguiar nay scale wet. the date of initiai appointment or from the date of comp!etion 0f probation period 2. Loarned counsei appearmg for the petitioner as we” as for the Stateiresoondents iointiy submit that the facts and question of iaw involved in the oteseni: writ petition are the same to that of in WP. (S) Noe 5976 of 2086 (Sushi! Tim/afi and otherss Vs. State Government of Chhattisgarh & Others; which was aiiowed vide order dated 07.”: 1.2008, 3. in View of the above-stated submission made by learned counsel for the parties the writ oetition is aiiowed in the same terms. No order as to costs. Sd/- Judge i i Satish K. Agnihotri Vs, RasmmieMs , 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through — THE Seoretam Eduoaiion Department, Dfrxsl Bhawan Raiour (C G ) 2 The Dire'ctor,’ Pumié Isstruct‘xon Departmené, Chha’iéiwam Gsvt. Raipur 3v District Educatiom Officer Burg, Distt. — Durg r" G ) 4. Pri5bi§éh écvt. Hr. Sec. Some! supega— BhiEaL Diatt. — Burg (CG) é’resent ‘ Shri Vipin Tiwari cmmse' forthe Detiiioner Shri Sushi! Dubev‘ Gcvt. Advocate for the Eiate, QRN Q §ER Mamh, 2%?) The Ouewon of iaw invoived herein a3 to whethey the petitioner is