S-, /t- L. ? -^ o0 (2) IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO^W 12006 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS y ^ ^^, ,--w € <-> f ^-*b ^ '\ ,^i ^'^. 'L ^ • ^ 4 ^^'^^^ s"s.^3 Shiv KumarVerma, Age 43 aboutyears, S/oLateShriD.R.Verma, Civil Line Colony, Q.No. - H/13, Mahurband Para, Distt. - Kanker (C.G.) VERSUS State Government of Chhattisgarh Through:- Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department & Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur(C.G.) District Education Officer, Kanker(C.G.) Block Education Officer Block-Kanker, Distt. - Kanker (C.G.) Joint Director (Treasury/Accounts), Jagdalpur(C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CQNSTITUTION OF INDIA ./- HISH COURT OF CHHATTISGARK AT BIL&SWR W. P.(S) Ro. 6694 of 2006 Petitioaer Respoudents Versus Shiv Kumar Verma State Goveniment of Chhattisgarh aad othcrs SB; Hon'bfc Mr. Justicc Satish K. A@iil80tri, J Present; Shri Soinkant Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Sushfl Dubey, Govt. Advocate for fhe respondents/State. ORDER (Passed on this 22nd day ofFehroaiy, 2007) 1. The petitioner was appoiuted as Assistant Teacher oa fixed pay of Rs. 300/-. After conipletion ofone year's probation, he was granted regular pay in fhe pay scale ofRs. 545-925/-. 2. Learued counsel appeariug for fhe petitioner submits fhat fhe issue iavolved iu fh.e case is asto whefher fhe petitioner is entifted to regular pay scale w.e.f. fhe date of initial appointaaent or fom. fhe date ofcoinpletion ofpKibationperiod. 3. The issue invot/ed, herein was coiisidered by the Madhya Pradesh State Admmisteative Tribyaal, Jabalpur in O.A. No. 2745/89 (Madhufeaat Yadu and 56 others Vs. State of M.P. & oth.ers), whercui it was held that the siiailarly situated teachers are entitled to regular pay scaie w.e.f. the date of iiiitiat appomtment. The matter was taken-up to fhe HonTsle Supreme Court ia Special Leave Petition (CiviO No. 6892/93. The said petition was dismissed by the Honlifc Supreme Court upholding the decision of fhe Tribunal to fhe efFect Thakur that the Teachers/AssistaiitTeachers are entitled to regular pay scale froin date ofinitial appom.tmeut. 4. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits fhat this Court, whfle coasulering the sanie issue ia SushU Tiwari & others Vs. State Govt of Chhattisgarh & ofhera (W.P. (S) No. 5976 of 2006) by order dated 7-11-2006, bas granted rcgular pay scale w.e.f. fhe date of initial appointmeat 5. Leamed counsel appearmg for the parties joinfty submit that this case is squarety covered by fhe decision of this Court in tfae case of Suslul Tiwari & others Vs. State Govt. of Cliliattisgarh & others (Supr^. 6. In view ofthat, fhis petitioB. is allowed in fhe saiae terms. No order as to costs. Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ,1V