SisigbBench C . ^ jo. L-- ^ IN THE HIGHJ?OJLJRT 01' JUDICATURE QF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(S.)NO. 6^t^~ /2011 PETITIONER: ^F ^' t\^w ^ ^0""-^' ...-• ^••<' Chhabilal Sahu S/o Sri Manohar Sai Sahu, aged about 56 years, Working as Upper Division Teacher, Govt. Middle School, Godhna, Block Navagarh, Distt Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ^^ VERSUS ^^ RESPONDENTS ^l) ^" 2) State of Chhattisgarh Through : The Secretaiy, School Education Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) The District Education Officer, District Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) Block Education Officer, Block Navagarh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) Joint Director Accounts Treasury and Pension Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 3) .4) HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SB : HON'BLB MR. JUSTICB PRITINKER DIWAKER PBTITIONBR RESPONDBNTS W.P.(S).NO. 6615/2011 Chhabilal Sahu versus State ofC.G. & Others Shri K.P.Saiiu, couusel for the petitioner, Shri Praveen Das, Dy.G.A. for the State. WRIT PBTITION UNDBRARTICLB 226 OP THB CONSTITUTION OF INDZA ORDER (14.11.2011) Grievance of fhe petitioner in ftie present petition is fhat fhe petitioner was appouited ia fhe year 1976 as Assistant Teacher on a fbced pay scale of Rs. 100 for a period of one year and after completion of probation, ia the year 1978, he was gianted regular payscaleofRs. 169-300. Contention of fhe counsel for fhe petitioner is fhat he is entitled for regular pay scale witii effect froin fhe date of uiitial appointaiexit aad his case is squarely covered wifh nuinber of decisions passed by fhis Court aad also the judgment rendered by fhe M.P. State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpiir in O.A. Na. 274S/89 ^SesAhukant Ye&du & 56 Others Vs. State c/M.P. Ss Others)where in it has been held that siinilarly placed teachers are entitied for regular pay scale from. fhe date offh.eir initial appoiatment. It is not disputed by bofh the parties fhat the niatter was taken up by fhe State to the Apex Court but fhe appeal was also disniissed by fhe Apex Court upholdiiig the decision of the Tiibunal to the effect that the Teachers/Assistaiit Teachers are entitled for regular pay scale froni fhe date of their initial apponitoieut. In view of the above submiission made by tiLie counsel for fhe parties, fhe petition is disposed of in tiie saine terms i.e. the petitioner is granted Hberty to make a representation, ifsoadvised, m fhe Ught of fhe aforesaid judgiaent and tlie circiilar dated 5,1.2011 (Annexure P/ 2 ) aiid ia tura, fhe concerued rcspondent is directed to consider his case on its own xnerits and ia its perspective. If fhe petitioner staads on fhe saine footmg as per order passed by the State Adniiaistrative Tribunal in Madhukant Yadu (supra) aad subsequenUy confirmed by fhe Suprenxe Court in Special Leave Petition (CivU) N0. 6892/93 by order dated 03.01.95, the petitioner may be entitled to same reUef accordiagly. It is expected from tixe State auftiorities to pass suitable order after due scrutiay ofthe facts. It is niade clear fhat this court has not expressed any opinion on fhe inerits of fhe case aiid ttie aiifhority concenied would be at Uberty to decide fhe representation stdctiy in accordance with law, Sd/- Pritinker Dhvaker Judge