I @D ,’@ a? 20??» x $§§w§$§£ EEWEé¥1 IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF‘CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR w.P. s No. 0%? /201o f 1.“?‘Sam‘osh Kumar Gupta, S/o Muhand p’ra, ged abouf 56 ear, LecTur‘er, Govt Boys" Higher Seonary Scho'ol, Maindragar', Block Manindr‘agarh,- DisH. Korea (.6 6.) Shivshcmkar Divedi, S/o w Salik Ra Dwivedi, aged abouf 5 yer's, Lcfurer‘ Gov’r. Boys her conda School, Chiriri, Khadganwa, Dis’r’r. Korea (C..) VERSUS - RESPO : 1‘. STale of Chhafflsgarh .Through :- The SecreTary, Tribal Welfare Depar‘rmen’r, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Commissioner Tribal Welfare Deparfmen‘l Chha’rfisgarh Govt, Raipur (C.G.) v? PETITIONERS lc Gu a ys cd nh m 9 a e, Hig Sery m Block G NDENTS ’@ @ 3. /A/ssis’ran'r Commissioner Tribal Welfare Deparfmen’r Disf‘r. (Baikunfhpur‘) Korea (6.6.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. sant Kuma upta ano VERS : State of Chhattisgarh Others. ’ Mu Llanhie Wm Samh K Agmhmig: J Prwe rl ajpu Advoca or the peoner 81 e} Lawr for the Statrespenden m Ix B awn Pan ye e/ts ( on ” day of Apri 2010) Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were appinted initially as Assista Teacher on a fixed pay on pobation. After comyletin of their respecti probation period, he petitiers were grted reguiar p scaie. Learned counsel fhzthr submits that the ssue invotved in the ease is asto Whether the petitioners are entitled to regul p scale wef th dat of initial appointment or after completion of probation period. e s s w v te tve bnal 2. . Larned counel for the partie jointly submit that the issue involved herein as considered by the Madha Pradesh Sta Administrai Triu Ti f sh “ DA’ ’) O A o 273/8 l d J6 ahalpu (or ort the I in N 49 (Jl/Iadhukmif zt and 0115 te d’c othe whe 1 was held that the Similay Sited teache a eniled o regula pa scale . the de of iniial appoment. The matter ten up to the Supreme Court. The appeal was diissed by the Supreme Coui upholding the decision ofthe Tribunal to the effect that the Tea/Assistant Teachers are eniled to regular pay scale In View o the above submissions made b learned counsel or he ie he peiion is disposed o in the sam terms the peioners are nted liei to make a representaion to the respondent authoriies i so advised, to conSidei tiieir cases and pass appropiiate order, on its own merit and in its perspective, in the lightof the order passed by the SAT in Mod/mkant Yadu (supra) and subsequently confirmed by the Supreme Couit in Special Leave ‘Petition (Civil) No. 6892/93 by order dated 3-1-1994. T I Sd/— p ‘ Satish K. Agnihotri ' Judge 713 vs bm 0f MP rs) iem t rl tua is ie tt t r } wef at t tm was ak sm t c‘ieis tt m (late of inial appomtmen f v f t parts t mit tt i e i e tti Gra btv t t t ( ,l t l Amit HIGH COURT OF CHH ATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRH PETITION (S) NO 2013 0f2010 PETITIONFR Q oqn i U & thur. SU RESPONDENTS & WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTIC LE 220 OF THE CONS llHJTlOV 01* NDI A m bh A b Rt te f nns ORDJLR (ORAL P¢.ss d ’9 l o nt r o ve t on an ay e i ar ay e e fro ti t u