@ ® Eyingitzz: @amh IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR C.G. (“/41 (r62 WP. (S) No....7. l S .............. 37”” 2011 V, PETITIONER................ Badri Prashad Purohit, S/ o Shri Ramcharan, Aged 50 Years, U.D.T., Girls Middle School, Baroli Basna District Mahasamund C.G. ESPONDENTS (1) The State Govt. of Chhattishgarh, Through — The Secretary, School Education Department, / D.K.S. Bhavan, Rajpur (C.G.) (2) District Education Officer, Mahasamund District Mahasamund ( C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OR MANDAMUSIDIRECTION OF OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT. R HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SB : HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA wagsy no. 45371201 1 PETITIONER Badri Prashad Pumhit RESPONDENTS Smtc of CLG. 8r. Others WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226v 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Appearance: Shri Somkant Verma, counsel for the petitioner. Smt. Smita Ghai, P.L. for the State] respondcntS. om 012nm (11.08.2011) The petitioner was initially appointed as Teacher on a fixed pay of Rs. 100. After compieiion of probation period, he was granted regular pay scale of Rs. 169—300. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the iesued involved in the case is as to Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular yay scale with effect from the date of iuitia} appointment or after completion of probation period. The issue involved herein was considered by the Madhya Pradesh State Administxative Tribunal, Jabalpur tn, O.A. NO. 2745/89 Madhukant Yadu and 56 Others v. State of M.P. 65 Others), wherein it was held that the similarly situated teachers are entitled to regular pay scale with effect from the date of initial appointment. The matter was taken up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The appeal was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court upholding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitled to regular pay scale from the date of initial appointment. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that this Coutt, While considering the same issue in Amar Sui Ram 8a Others Vs. State of Chhatusgarh & Others, W.P.{S) No. 4725/2006, by order veimcation of the facts. In View of the foregoing, this to costs, ‘ petition is disposcd of. No mdcr as Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge