HI6H COURT OF CHHATTISSARH AT BILASPUR W. P.(S) No. 2628 of 2007 Petitioners Versus 1. 2. Rcyesh Shid<lo Aged about 38 Years, S/o. 9iri Harprasod Shukla Assistant Teacher, Primory School Hiwgir, Navagaon, Manohar Singh Mandavi Aged about 43 yecrs, S/o. Shri Mundoru Rom Mandwi Assistant Teacher, Primary School Alibedo, 3. Chhobilal Yodav Aged Aout 42 Years, S/o. Sangoru Ram yadav Assistant Teacher, Middle School Kokpur, 4. Smt. Rubina Tcrnnum Aged about 41 Years, W/o. 5hri Sheikh Sqjjad Assistont Teacher, Primcry School &uspuri, All are at Btock Kaiker, Distt. Konker (C.6.) 1. State of Chhcttisgarh, Through Secretary, School Education Department, &.K.S. Bh<»»<»i, Raipur (C.S.) 2. The Oirector Public Instruction bepartment Raipur (C.©.) 3. District Educaton Officer Kanker &istriet Kanker (C.S.) 4. Btock Education Officer Kanker (c.e.) 5. Treasury <S Punds Oepartment Kanker (C.©.) Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India SB'- Hon'ble Shri Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. Present: Mr. &.N. Prqjapati, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Sunita Join, Panel Lawyer fop the State/respondents. OR&ER (Passcd on this 1st Dcy of May, 2007) 1. The question of law invofv^d herein is asto whether the petitioners are entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment or from the date of complefion of probation period. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as for the State/respondents jointly submit that the facts and question of law involved in the present writ petition «re the same as to that of in W. P. (S) No. 5976/2036 (Su^iil Tiwari and others vs. State Sovemment of Chhattisgarh &others), which was allowed vide order dated 7.U.2X)6. Subhash 3. In view of the dwve-stated submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, 1he writ petition is allowed in the some terms. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. A^ Judge