1 2j@ B^nf^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) W.P. (S) N0. '?3^Z^ /2011 PETTnONER ^. ^" ^yx. €%^ RESPONDENTS : -•^^?^ 1: 2. 3; 4. ^" 5. 6. Manrakhan Lal Borker, Aged about 54 years, S/o Shri Ramnath Borker, Lecturer, Government Higher Secondary School Singhabhedi, Block Chowki, District-Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Tribal welfare Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.6.) The Commissioner Tribal Welfare Department Raipur (C.6.) Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Department Rajnandgaon (C.6.) Block Education Officer Chowki, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Joint birector, Treasury, Account Pension, Raipur (C.G.) The Principle Government Higher Secondary School, Singhabhedi, Chowki, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ^ ^^^- I WRFT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA s^-' HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISQARH AT B3LASPUR SB : HON*BLB MR. JUSTICE PRIT2NKBR DIWAKER W.P.(S|.NQ. 7362/2011 PETITIONBR RESPONDENTs versus Maarakhan LaJ Borker State of Clihattisgarh & Others Shri K,S.Pawar, counsel for liie petitioner. ShriYashwant Singh Thakur, Dy. A.G. for the State. WRJT PBTIT20N UNDBR ARTXCI^^26_OF,THBCONSTITUTIpN OF INDSA ORDBR (07.12.2011] Grievaace of the petitiouer in fhe present petition is tliat tlie petitioner was appoiated as Assistaiit Teacher ou a fixed pay scale of Rs. 100-150 axiid after completion of probation, he was graated regular pay scaie ofRs. 169-300. Contention of the counsel for tiie petitioner is that he is exitifled for regular pay scate with effect frora the date of iaitial appoititment aad his case is squarely covered with uiiinber of decisions passed by tiiis Cozu't aad also the judginent rendered by fhe M.P. State Admmistrative Tribunal, Jabalpiir m O.A. N^. 274S/89 fflSci&hukant Yodu & 56 Others ¥s.State ofM»P. Ss Ofehers^ where m it ha.s been held tliat similarly placed teachers are eatitled for regular pay scale from ftie date of tlieir initial appoiatoient. It is not disputed by both the parties th.at the inatter was taken up by tlie State to tlie Apex Court but flie appeal was also dismissed by the Apex Court zipholdnig the decision of the Tribunal to fhe. effect that the Teachers/Assistaiit Teachers are entitled for regular pay scale froni the date of their initial appoiiitment. In view of the above subniission made by the coiinsel for the parties, tlie petitioa is disposed of ia tlie saBie teiiiis i.e, the petitioner is graiited Uberty to m.ake a representatioii, ifso advised, ia ..•fftf •N fhe Ught of the aforesaid judgiiient aixd the cit'cular dated 27.12.08 (Annexure P/2) aiid ia tum, fhe concemed respondent is drrected to consider fh.err case on its own nierits and ia its perspective. If fhe petitioner staads on fhe saine foofcmg as per order passed by the State Adniinista:ative Tribunal iii Madhiikaiit Yadu (siipra) aod subsequently confimied by the Supreme Coiirt in Special Leave Petition (Civil) N0. 6892/93 by order dated 03.01.95, the petitioner Biay be entitied to same reUef accordnigly. It is expected from fhe State autliorities to pass suitable order after due scrutmy ofthe facts. It is inade clear fhat this court has iiot expressed aiiy opiiiion on fhe nierits of the case acd tlie authority concemed would be at libeily to decide the representation stdctiy in accordance with law. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge