,1" Es ^. 8 T. f! .<-,. .. -• F ^^ t -a-o^ _ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CHHATTISGARH '. P. (S) No. ^ .c» .^l^ ,*"'\^ 39 years, ^' Teacher, &ovt -d^ w <^ 4^^^ /^•^'!^ ..' 1/s/ <:-^ iy^-Ku^\s1 2. The 3. Assistant Commissioner, y PETmON UNDER AKH.O.ES 2^6 OF THE CONSTITVTION OF INDIA FOPR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT OF MANOMUS AND CERTEORARI ETC. OR DIRECTtON/ORDER OFLIKE NTURE ETC: - z /'<•" HZ6H COURT GF CHHATTTSSARH AT BII W.P.fS^No. 947of2(K)7 Smt. Vimla Sahu l/»yi iesponaents State of Oihattisgarh and others SB: t-ion'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agfrihotri, J Present: Mr. AmiT Kumar Verma, Adwcate for the petitioner. fAs. Sunita Jain, Panel lawyer for the State/respondents. yassed on -this 20ffl Day of February, 2007) th 1. 71ie peti+ioner was appointed vide order dated 5 Au9USt, 93 ( P/l) as Assistant Teacher on fixed oay scale of Rs. 1200/-. After :ompletion of two yews prQbation, she was gronted regufar pay scaie of Rs. 1200-40-1440-50-2040/-. 2. Learned couna! appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the case is asto whether the petitjoner is entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. t'ne date of initiai appointment or after compfstion of probation period. 3. The isaie invoived, herein was considered by the Madhya Prodesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jdsalpur in O.A. No. 2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 others Vs. State of M.P. & others), wherein it was held tiiat the simi!ar!y situoted teachers are entitied to regular poy w.e.f. the date of initiai e^pointment. TTie matter taken-up to -ttie Hon'bSe Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civi!) No. 6892/93. The so.id petition was dismissed by the Hon'bte Supreme Court uphoiding the decision of the Tribuna! to the effect -*s; that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitled to regubr pay scale from date of initial appointment. 4. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner furrtier submits that this Court, while considering the same issue in S-iar Proaid Kurre & others Vs. State of OihatS-isgarh & others (W.P. (S) No. 5191 of 2006) by order dated 3.10.2(X)6, has gronted reguiar poy scaie w.e.f. •rtie date of initial appointment. 1 Learned counse! appearing for the parties jointly submit that tiiis case is squareiy covered by the decision of this Court' in •rtie case of Har Praad furre & others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & otiiers Bablu 6. In view of that, this petition is disposed of in the ame terms, No as to costs. Sd/- SatishK.Agnifaotri Judge