^ [IGH'O X^7"OTrT' -?^"I?T'?T'Ti!^M^T /C1^ WlUJ J''JllI_l_lUn_t»J_ 1. Harishchandra Masih, A.eed about 43 Years, S/o Shri Jhularain Masih, Assistant Teacher, Govt. Priman' Sc.hool, Cliliirpani, Tahsil Kharsia, Distt. Raigarfa (C.G.) 2. Prem Singh Rathiya Aged about 50 years S/o Butiya Ram Rathiya Assistairt Teachei' Goven-smeiit Middle School, Gadapali, Tahsil Kharsia, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.). 3. Manba2-ial Singh Rathiya, Aged about 44 year, >/o SIiri Paras Ram Ratluva, Assistaiit Teacher Govemment Primary School, Deepapara (Nangoe), Tahsil Kharsia Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) 4. Bhuvneshwar Patel; Aged about 44 year, S/o Briimohaa Patel Assistant Teacher Govenimeiit Primari'- School Ravanbhata (Barra), Tahsil Kharsia, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) 5. Nandlal Patel, Aged about 43 year, S/o Vijay Ram Patel, Upper Division Teacher, Govemmeat H.S.School Botalda, Block Kliarsia, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) Ravaabfaata (BaiTa) Tahsil Kliarsia, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretarv', School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawaii, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Tfae Director Public Instructiou Depaitmeat Raipur(C.G.) 3. Disfa-iot Education Officef Raigarh District Raigarh (C.G.) 4. Block Education Offscei- Kliarsia, Distt. RaigaA f^\ • l^..\J.} 5. Assistant Commissioner Tribal VVeifare Departoient Raigarh (C.G.) 'ETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA [on'Me Justtee Shri Satfah K. Asalhotn- Present: Sliri Anil Moun'a. Advocate fer me oetitioaers. Sfari A-S.Kachhwaha, Govt. Advocate forthe State/respondeat: (Passed on 26"'1 day of June, 2007) TSie question of law involved herem is asto whether the petitioiiers are snf^l -'^.A—t-i.ed to regular pav scale w.e.fthe date ofinitial appomtaient or from *^ t'ae date ofcompletion ofprobation period. (S^ 2. Lsamed counsel appearing for the petitioaer as well as for the State/respondents joiatly submit that the facts and questioii of law iavolved iii the present writ petition are the same as to that ofin W.P.(S) No. 5976/2006 (Susfeil Tbt'ari others Vs. State Govermnent of dihattisgarh & Othera), vAichwas allowed vide order dated 7.11.2006. 3. However, the Stats Govemment is at liberty to verifv the appointment of the petitioners in order to fiad out whether the facts ofthe present case are ideatical to that ofW.P.(S) No. 5976/2006 (supra). In view ofthe above-stated submissions made by leamed counsel for the pailies, the \wit petition is allowed ia the same terms. No order as to costs. Sd/- . Satish K.Agnihotri - Judge : ^,