^ HI6H «3URTOF CHHATTISiMRH AT BILASn» W. P.ffilNo. 1658 <rf2007 Petitioner Respondents Versus Oinesh Kunwr Ncyok S/OShri Tild< R«BDAged about 46 yeors R/0 Basont'altt Tdisit Kunkuri Oistrict Jtshpur [C.e.] 1. Stote of Chhuttis9<rh thrbugh the Secretory Tr&al Welfare Oeparlnient, DX5. Bhavon, Aterrtralaya, Raipur (.C.G.) 2. Secretwy &ep<rtment of Rnance, D.K.S. ttwan, Mantralayo, Riripur(C.©.) 3. Commissionw, Tribd Wclfare Oeportment, Jadipur (.C.6.) 4. Assistant Commissioncr, Tribd Wetfwe Dep<rtment, District Jashpur (Cj6.) SB: HonWe Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnilwlri, J Present: Ms. Binu Pathak, Advocate fa- the petittoner. My; Arvind Dubey, Ponel Uii»yerfor State/reapondents. O R t>E R passed on this 21" E>ay of March, 2007) 1. The question of h»»inwlved hcrein asto Nihettier the petitioner is f^ entitled to re9ular p<y scale w.e.f. the date of initial <ypointment or from •the dcrt-e of completion of probcrt-ion period. 2. Leorned coufBel oppeorirg for the petitioner as Nfellos for the State/respondents jointly aibnwt that the facts and question of l<n» invohred the present writ petition are the some 1o that of in W. P. (5) No. 5976/2006 (Sushil TwcB-i and othws vs. State Sovwnment of Chhattisgarh Aothers), trfiich wasollowed vide order dated 7.11.2006. 3. In view of the above-stoted submissions nwiate by leamed counsel fw the ptrties, the writ petition is alloimd in •thc sane terms. No order as to ^. costs. ___ Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Subhash