mm ..H.«..622..¢za)..ix£la:§li‘ mm Le 00 Gricvancc of the petition r in the pmsent etition i that the petiu'oner was appointed s Assistant Ther on a Ed pay scale of Rs. 100-150 for period of two yea nd fter completion of probation, he wa gaied regular pay scale of Rs. 169—300K Contenu'on of the couns for the petitioner is that he is entitled for regular pay scale w th c§ect from the date f initial appointment and his case is s uarely covered with nier of decisions passed by this Court by the M‘P. State Administratiw 2745/89 (Madhulmnt Yadu & Others) wherein it has been he] are entitled for regular pay see appointment. It is not disputed by both taken up by the State to the Apt dismissed by the Apex Court t o imb and also th judgment rendered : Tribunal, Jaalpur in 0.A. No. 56 thers Vs. State of MJ’. & .d that smilarly placed teachers Lle from the date of their l the parties that the matter was at Comt but the pea was also upholding the decision of the nt a initia Tribunal to the effect that the eachexs/Assista Techers are entitled for regular pay scalegnnm the date of their l ‘ t appoinnnent. l fi 2 p s eac m rs a a n e b O i initia apl W m w Wm m 11%? m matW mm?W 1%6 m1? $ m1?m . SB : HON’BLE-MR. JUSTICE PIRITINKER DIWAKER i 24.1 1.2010 Shri Gautam Khetrapal, c ounsel for the petih'o'ner. the parties, the peu'tion is (lisp petitioner is granted liberty advised, in the light of the afo dated 27.12.2008 and in directed to consider their c perspech've. If the petitioner order passed by the State Adm Yadu (supra) and subsequen Court in Special Leave Petitic dated 3.1.1995, the petitioner accordingly. / It is expected mm the s cider after due scmtiny of the 1 It is made clear that opinion on merits of the ca would be at liberty to decidl accordance with law. sed of in the same terms i.e. the make a representation, if so said judgment and the circular the concemed respondent is on its own mexits and in its d er , a s on the same footing as p inistrate Tribunal in Madhukant tly conhrmed by the Supreme rn (Civil) No. 6892/98 by order may be entitled to same relief tate authorities to pass suitable ‘acts. ”s Court has not expressed any and the authority concerned : the representation strictly in Sdl— Pritinker Diwaker Juge [u'm h tat s d