f^Z^-y IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR w.p.lslNCit. L(6*A'3> /201Q PETITIONERS ^^ ..•\f-. V y >^ y^y ^ ^' »/f',..-<'': " :. ^y •<<u t<S- ^QOM(»< fv,^°~^ 1. r^l. Devi Prasad Rathore, S/o Shri Nanakram Rathore, aged about 55 years, Upper Division Teacher, Govt, Higher Secondary Sehool, Darrighat, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) /I. Ramkhilawan Maravi, S/o Late JhurursLm Maravi, aged about 56 years, Head Master, Govt. Girl's Primary School, Limtara, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) ^VESSUS /^: 1: State of Chhattisgarh Through :- The Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) ^2. District Education Officer, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER As mentioned in fhe c'ause title above. RESPONDENtS -innmi^sa^S'V!, S^SSaSSKgf^^yMi3!i <Z^o 'B; HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISQARH : SiLASPUR SJnale Bench; Hon'bleShri ManmtiTa_Mohan!,SlinyastavaLJ, PETITSONER •sz^ssf^St.sr^ss.iTS: WRiT PETiTION fS) N0.4643/201u Devi Prasad Ratiiore and another Versus StateofGhhattisgam andanother WRiT PET3TSGN yNOERARTiGLg 22S QF THfcCGNSrTUTiON OE iNDjA Presenf: - ShriS iriSomkaRtVerma.counssiforthspeiifionei |vis.SinitaGhai,PanBiLawyei'fortheState., GRALGRSER ': ' ' ' (Passed on 19lh bfAugust, 2010) The petitjoneis were injtiaily appointed as ftssistant Teauher on a fixed pay of Rs.100/-. After compietidn of their probation period, they were gianted reguiarpay scaie ofRs.169-300;-. 2 . Leamed counsel appearing fbr the petitioners submitteu that the issue involved in the case is as to whetherthe petifiongirs are entitied 10 reguiar pay scate with eiTect from the date of initial appointment or aftar completion of prObationperiod. , lll 3. The issue involved herein was considered tw fhe Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunai, .jabaipur ih P.A.No.2745/89 (Madfeu^snt ysto sncf 56 Otfivrs v. State oflw.P. Sotfieraj.whwemitvias heid tnat the sjmiiariy situateu teachers are entitied to reguiar pay scaie with effect from the date of initiai appointment. The matter was taken yp to ttla Hon'bie Supreme Court. The appeai was dismissed by the Hohble SupFen^®s"ttuptioloinfl the decision of the Tribunai fo the effect tHat the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitled to reguiar pay seaie from ttie date of initiai aDpointmeht. 4. in view of tne abcwe stated submissions made iiy tearned counsei ror the parties, the witpsffion is dispoaBd ofin fhesarneierms j.e. ttie petitioners are gr-anted iibeny to rnake reprssentatipn, if so adv'ised, to cohsider tHeir case, if they stand on the same foutings as per order dated 24-08-1992 passedby the Madhya Pradesh State Adminfetrative Tribunal, Jabaipur in OA.No.2745 uf 88 fnasfhukant Yadii ^upra) and subsequentiy confirmeu by order dated 03-01-1994 passed by e Hon'bis Supreme Gourt in S.LP.No.6892/1993 and grantreiiefaccordingiy. 5 Nooidoiastocosts. Sd-/ ManindraMohan Shrivastava —^ , Judge