^Jl^g S3' @^ E:=!?.S.F&i! wyLE BENCJ-- c s~, ^00^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH W. P. (S) No. ^S 5" / 2006 PETITIONERS 3^ JS^ ^'^^?""- A©"'.l <*-** ^^••- ..-p _ CJL ^ ^^ ^ 1. Naval Kumar Gouraha S/o. Shri Narayan Prasad, aged about 41 years Working as Assistant Teachers Govt. Primary School Chandeepara, Khokhra, Block - Nawagarh Distt. Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) / 2. Rajendra Kumar Sharma S/o. Shri Kapoor Chand,aged about 36 years working as Assistant Teacher Govt. Primary School Singhul , Block -Nawagarh Distt. Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS (-. ^ .-y",i^^ /^^y /^^ ,^^y ^my^ .^ State of Chhattisgarh - Through The Sectetary, Department of School Education, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The District Education Officer, Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA XI-HC-78 HmMI Sh*1|cft TS?^IFTR:PT, ®Tn*ns,Rlclltiy __ u>-p-c^^-^^/^ W1T 200 3TT^?TiraW (yit^qyT) an^rwfera; trarsTi^Tshiw ?THiwHf?g'3:n^i' 11.12.200e ShriA.V. Shrivastava, leam|i Shri Ajay Dwivedi, leamed ff Heard. By this petition under Arti(}l India, the petitioners seek a increments and seniority on the| appointment in the light of the dec| Administrative Tribunal, Jabaipt 1452/1998 (Harish Chandra Singh) ottiers)dated 31.1.20)0 2. Leamed counsel appearing copy of the order dated 9-11-2Q Petttion (S) No. 6123/2006 ( Suren) Chhattisgarh and crihers) and situated, therefore, the similar orde( lles 2261227 of the Constitution of direc|Uon to ttie respondente to pay the basis of the date of their inidal iion rendered by the leamed State »r in Origlnal Application No. and ottiere Vs. State of M.P. and 2(106 subnhits 3. The case of the petitioner^ Assistant Teachere in the School fbr a period of two years witti the fi^ completion of two years' probatior but, they were not given the regul initial appointments. Other similarly Administrative Tribunal, Jabatpur leamed Tribunal vide order dated shWfd-sfl-f ll|tl<-<l'fftetA'<Rl'wl< ^;3i^iT3n^?r d counsel for the petitioners. ,L. for the State/respondents. |for the petitioners pfaced on record passed by this Court in Writ ira Kumar and another Vs. State of that the petitioners are similarly may be passed. is that they were appoinled as Iducation Department on probation ^ed salary. However, later on, after |, the petitioners were regularized |ir pay scale from the date of their Isituated teaehers moved the State for regular pay-scale, wherein 1.1.2000 allcwed the same. The P.T.O. q^ XI-HC-78 sn^T^rf^iR) (WTSn^Tstiii'n *11<1WI Sb*1iqi 35T'<<l<<lcl'q,®Tntf'IS,RlClltfy ^.P.^^^D..^^6/^06 ^ 200 3ll^!?l fW ('iyiy'ift) ?:RTOTHf?cT3n^r petitioners made severai rep have not paid any heed. Thus, t^ «bi<ifivi<fl-< *<itic'iTiftec^t<R]t<i< ^srf^ITSD^T •esentaUons to accord the same treatment as they were also sirtiilarly sttuated, but, the respondents s petition. 4. Leamed counsel for the p|etitioners submits ttiat the petitioners may be allowed to make a repr^sentation to respondent No.1 to give similar treatment to the petitior been sanctioned to other simitari ers and same pay-scale whieh has ^ situated teachers on account of the order of the State Administrativ^ Tribunal dated 31.1.2000, to which iearned counset for the responde|nts/State has no objecflon. 5. Having heard leamed couhsel for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances o< the case, in the opinion of this Court, ttie limited prayer made by iearn^d counsef for the petitioners appeare to be reasonable. Therefore, th^ petitionere are allowed to make a representation within a period of| No.1, raising alt their grievance^ decide the said representation irj 6. direction. No order as to costs. 7. Certified copy as per rules two weete from today to respondent and, in tum, respondent No.1 shail an objective manner within a period of 30 days from the date of ifeceipt of such representation, after considering ail the points raise|d by the petiUoner and taking into account the order dated 31.1.p000 passed by the tearned State Administrative Tribunal in Origin^l Application No. 1452/1998. The writ petitton is accor(|ingly disposed of with the aforesaid Sd/- DhirendraMishra Judge P.T.O.