C 2/3;6J3€a/j/ ED @) WRIT PETITION No. €31”? Izoos PETITIONER’S : /1. Venkat Raman Pratap Singh, S/o. Shri Gouri Shanker Aged about 37 years, Head Master, Govt. Middle School, Khorsi, Block — Pamgarh, Distt.- Janjgir— Champa (C.G.) Ramesh Kumar Gadewai, S/o. Duli Ram Gadewal, Aged about 37 years, Head Master Govt. Middle School, Navapara, Block — Nawagarh, Distt.- Janjgir-Champa . Estore Minje, S/o. Shri Suleman Minje, Aged about 38 years, lecturer, Govt. Girl’s Hr. Sec. School, Janjgir, Distt.— Janjgir—Champa (C.G.) VERSUS . State of Chhattisgrh, Through — The Secretary, Department of Education, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) . Director, Public Instruction Raipur Chhattisgarh. Joint Director, Public Instruction Bilaspur Sambhag, (C.G.) District Education Officer, Distt. —Janjgir—Champa (C.G.) RESPONDENT’S IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH i1 A ® I ~ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA i HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR w. P. (s) No. 5815 of 2006 Pe1i bners : Venkat Raman Pratap Singh as others Versus Respondents : State of Chhatu'sgarh & others Flinde Bench: Hon’blc Mr. Jusu‘ce Satkh K. woui. Shri Anil Singh Rajput, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri Sumit Vanna, Panel lawyer for the State] respondents. ORDER (27th October, 2006) Learned counsel appealing for the petifinner submits that the petitioners were appointed on the post of Upper Division Teacher vide order dated 29.3.1992 (Annexme P/ 1) in the pay scale of Rs. 1400 — 2640. It is further submitted by learned counsel for tm petih’oners that amr a period of three years the services of the petitioners have been regularized but for the mst three years the petitioners were paid only Rs. 800/- p.m. though they were entitled to get monthly payment on the basis of regular pay scale. during that period. Learned counsel for the peu'tioner placed reliance on a decision of the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative 'I‘Iibunal passed on 18.2.2000 in O.A.No. 3006/ 1993 (Utam Kumar Banjari and others Vs. State of MP. 8; others). In that case the petitioners were appointed on the post of Upper Division Teacher in the pay sr-ale of Rs. 1400—2640 vide order dated 29.3.1992 hut subsequently the Joint Director, Public Instruch'ous, Hoshangabad passed the order that instead of payment of salary in the regular scale of pay of Rs. 1400-2640 the petitioners would be paid only consolidamd fixed sum of Rs. 800/~ for thme years and only after three years, they would be given salary in the regular scale of pay. beamed Tribunal quashed the Oder passed by the Joint Director and dimcted the lespondents to make payment of salmy in the regular scale of pay of Rs. 1400-2640 along with all applicable allowances hem the date of appointment of the peu‘tioners. Learned counsel for thr- pctih'oner further submits that the quesh'on of law and the facts involved in this petition are too similar to that of in the case of Utam Kumar Ranjari & others Vs. State of M.P. 8r. othets O.A.No. 3006/ 1993. The pxesent case is squarely covered by the order dated 18.2.2000 passed by the Tribunal in O.A.No. 3006/ 1993. Learned counsel appean'ng for the respondents fairly concedes and agrees with the submission made by the petitioner. For the above stated reasons the petitioners are granted four weeks time to make a representation betbre the competent authorities to consider the ease of the petitioners in the same terms as per the order dated 18.2.2000 passed in 0.A.No. 3006/ 1993. In the event the petitioners stand on the same position, the petitioners are entitled to the same relief. For the reasons stated above, this petih‘on is disposed o£ i Thakur t Sdl— Satish K. Agniho Judge tri x