W\5?2" 3/ 3‘DQ'e Bench IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILAsPUR (ca) W.P. S NO. g /2011 g/ PETITIONER : Sifar‘am Chm‘mwani, aged abou‘r 61 year‘s, S/o Shri Ifwar‘i Ram Chafr'awani, Lecfur'er', Government Higher Secondary School, Lakhmm, Block Bilha, DisT‘r. Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1.(/ Sfafe of ChhaT’risgar'h Through Secremr‘y, School Educafion Deparfmenf D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur‘ (C.G.) 2. The Direcfor Public Ins’rrucfions Raipur (C.G.) 3. Di‘sfr‘ic’r Educa’rion officer Bilaspur, Disf’r. Bilaspur (6.6.) 4. Joim‘ Direc‘ror, Treasury, accoum‘s, pension, Bilaspur Division, Biiaspur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA \/"\. 20 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SB : HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRITINKER DIWAKER “Lam 1m. 4705_1_2o1 1 PETITEONER Sitaram Chatrawani REsPONDENTs Stats of QG. u Others WRIT Pmmoxv UNDER gRTICLE 226122? OF THE CONSTxTU'noN OF " INDIA éppearance: Shli B.L.Dembm, counsel for ths peu’iioner. Shn' N. Naha. Roy, P.L. for the State. ORAL ORDER (13.08.2011) Gn'evance of thc petitionér in the pres‘snt petition 1S that The petju'oner was appointed as Dcputy Teacher on a f1xe€1 pay scaie of Rs. 150 for a psriod of two years and aftsr complotion of probation, he was granted mgular pay scale of Rs. 169—300. Contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that he is entitled for Kegular pay scale with eEect from the date of initial appointment and his case is squarely covered with number of decisions passed by this C0111? and also the judgment rendered by the M‘P. State Administrative‘Txibimal,dabalpur in 0.A. No. 2745/89 (M’adhukant Yadu 8a 56 Others Vs. State afMJ’. & Others) Where in it has been held that similarly placed teachers are entitled for regular pay scale from the date of their initial appointment. It is not disputed by both the parties that the matter was taken up by the State to the Apex Court but the appeal was also dismissed by the Apex Court upholding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitled for regular pay scale from the date of their initial appoinmient. In View of the abova submission made by the counsel for the parties, the petition is disposed of in the same harms 116. the petitioner is granted libexty to make a rspresentation, if so advised, in the light of the aforesaid judgment aud the circuiar dated 5. 1.2011 (Annexure P/ 2) and in turn, the concerned respondent is directed to consider their case on its own men'ts and in its perspective. If the petitioner stands on the same footing as per order passed by the State Administrative Tribunal in Madhukant Yadu (supra) and subsequently coniirmed by the Supreme Court in Special Leave Pention (Civil) NO. 6892/Q3 by order dated. 03.01.95, the petitioner may be entitled to same relief accordingly. It is expected from the State authorities to pass suitable order after due scrutiny of the facts. It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the authority concerned would be at iibeny to decide the 1epresentation strictly in accordance with law. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge