mGaCXHJRTOFafflATTISGABHATBILASPlJR PETITIONER8 RESPONDENT8 Writ PetUion (S^ No.637 of2008 1. Heera Lal Markam, aged about 50 years, S/o Shri Jannan Sin^i Markam, Head Master Govemmeiit Middle School Kalavati, Kota, Bloek Kota, District Bilaspur (CG). 2. Harprasad Jaiswal, aged about 56 years, S/o Shri Bhaiyaram Jaiswal, Assistairt Teacher, Govemment Primary School Dhaurabhata, Kota, Block Kota, Distt. Bilaspur(CG). VERSUS' 1. State ofChhattisgarii, througii Secretary, School Education Department, DKS Bhawati,Raipur (CG). 2. The Director Public IngtTucliou Department Raipur (CG). 3. Blocfc Education Officer Kota, District Bilaspur (CG). 4. District Edueation OfBcer Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG). (WRTT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTTTUTION OF INDIA) (SB: Hon'Mfi Mr. Satish K. Aeirihotai. J.) Present : 8hriDhirendraMishra,Advocateforthepetitioners. Shri AlokBakhdu, Govt. Advocateforthe State/respondents. ORALQRDER (Passedon l^h ofTtebruary,20(») 1. Thepetitioners were nutially appointedon 24.01.80 as Assistant Teachers on fixed pay of Rs. 150/-. After eompletion of probation, tfae petitioners were granted regular pay scale. 2. Sunilariy situated employees had approached the Madhya ftadesh State Adinuustrative Tribunal, Jabalpur, The Tribunal passed the order on 24.08.1992 mO.A.No. 2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 others Vs. State ofM.P.A Others.). 3. It was fiirther held fhat the said benefit would be given to all the teachers and they should not be compelled to approach the Tribunal for similar benefit individually or collectively. 4» Being aggrieved, the then State ofMadhya Pradesfa had filed tfie Speeial Leave Petiticin (Civil) No. 6892/93 unpugning tfae order dated 24.08.1992 passedbythe Madhya Pradesh Adnunistrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A. Ng[;2745/89. The Honble Supreme Court after liearing counsel for tfae parties, dismissed the Special Leave Petition atidhaving regard to the large financial implications, grarited one'year's time to settle the claun for the arrears without interest vide order dated 03.01.1994. It was fiirther observed that the intervetiticm would work out their rights in accordanee with taw. This order dated 24.08.1992 A, passed by the Tribunal in O.A. No. 2745/1989 is applicable to Ifae petitioners being siinilarly situated and they are accordingly entitled to tfae same benefif. Leamed eounsel appearing for the petitioners submits that this Coiirt while considering the same issue in Ram Kiimar Sahu and otfaers Vs. State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and another in Writ Petition-(S) No. 813 of by order dated 12.02.2007, has granted regular pay scale w.e.f. tfie date pfinitial appoinfment Leamed counsel appearu^ for the parties jointly submittfaat this case is squarely eovered by the decision ofthis Gourt in the case of Ram Kumar Sahu and otiiers Vs. State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and another (Supra). However, the state is at liberty to verify the facts of appointment asto whether&e case ofthe petitionere are similar to that ofthe order dated 12.02.2007 passed bythis court in W.P. (S) No. 813 of2007 (Supra). In view ofthat this petition isallowed in the same terms i.e. petitioners are entitled to the same relief as was granted by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A. No. 2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 otfaers Vs. State of M.P. & others) and subsequently confirmed by order dated 03.01.94 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 6892/93. The petitioners shall be govemed by the orders passed by the Tribunal as well as by the Hon'ble Supreme Court (supra) accordingly. No order asto costs. Sahn- T.' •Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge f—--^'—~ ^k