^ r c^ \ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRITPETITION (Sl No.^^ /2011 PETITIONER ^l.,--..\£i^ €^'y... ^•^^-''l...--'" ^•••:W-T"'M\-'-"" ^; ,...-"^'v^'i .^^°"> RESPONDENTS: Chaitnya Prasad Patel S/ o Shri Siya Ram Patel about 54 Years occupation Head Master, Middle School Kartala, Block Kartala Distt. Korba (C.G.) VERSUS .(^. 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Deportment, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, .. (C.G.) 2. Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Deporta-aent, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 3. Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Deportment, Korba DistrictKorba (C.G.) WRIT UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. PERTICULAR OF THE PETITIONERS: As per cause title. 2; PERTICULAR OF THE RESPONDENTS: As per cause title. ^> -^ '"^^^^sssiss.s.ssfi.fjafi '•••i.w— '3~ST '<iW\v\t{, ^T^Wfs, fslcll'!-!^ to-P'(&)v^o-°?ass& sn^r '<^v (t^-f^fi) CT^i Vi feini- -fl'(i3(I^['B?qW TBliw^iNaT^r SB : Hon'bie Shri Manindra Mohah Shrivastava. J. 21-08-2011 Shri Ashwani Shukia, counsej Shri N.Naha Roy, Panel Lawt finaily. successfuliy compteting the prob^ ^raferth'qiiRff if 1yst ^SRSR ^arRitTan^r for the petitioner. rerfortheState. With the consent of iearned (tounsel for the parties, the matter is heard fhe petitioner was appoir(:ed on a fixed pay of Rs.150/-. After ion period of 2 years, he was granted reguiarpayscaie. ; » Learned counsel appearingj for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the case is as to whet'rjer, the petitioner is entitled to regular pay 1 scaie with effect from the date of| initiai appointment or after completion of probation period. ; The issue invoived herein State Administrative Tribunai, Jabsl |was considered by the Madhya Pradesh jipur in O.A.No.2745/89 {Madhukant Yadu and 56 others v. State of M.P, & others), wherein, it was heid that the similariy situated teachers are entitied to regular pay scale with effect from the date of initial appointment. fThe matter was taken up to the Hon'bie Supreme Court in sDeciat Leave Pietition (Civil) No.6892/93. The said petition was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, upholding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the nachers/'Assistant Teachers are entitied to reguiar pay scaie from the date ofpnitial appointment. Learned counse! appearin^ for the petitioner further submits that this Court, whiie considering the sam4 issue in Amar Sai Ram & Others v. State or' Chhattisgam & Others fW.P.(S) No.4725/2006] by order dated 01/09/2006, !i[OT*)ii ia'M yyncss. i',5r.n,p,r-t-..t s; j -'; —2.33; i _i, 50.000. XI-HC—78 Mnftr (h*l|ch ^SET ^ii<qi<n^, yiily< , fq^wy ..{D..^..S).'^..:.S;^ln •¥F[200 sn^i XR?T ('^(3^1) aii^i ^ir [<-ii+ 'cTSSfT SW^ sf)*ii<* TOTOT'ofei an^i ^- <»)i^fet<ftitnq^iy if ^^ <P(|^R. ^aiRnan^r Deeptj ailowed the petitioners to make a r^presentation within a period often days, raisihg all their grievances. Learned Gbunsel for the petilioner further submits that now the State Govt. has issued an order on 5"' Jafiuary, 2011 wherein, it has been ordered that those who have been appointejd before 1982 and after 1995 on a fixed pay, are entitied to reguiar pay scal^ successfut compietion of 2 years pe< Accordingly, the petitioner is| raising all his grievances, in iight dated 13.01.2009 & order dated respondent is directed to decide thel from the date of initial appointment upon tiod ofprobation. Igranted iiberty to make a representation |of the aforesaid judgment and cireuiars 5.1.2011, and in turn, the concemed [representation, ifany, in accordance with iaw.on its own merits, within a perio|d ofthree months from the date of receipt ofthe representation, subject to veri in view of the foregoing, this jtietition is disposed of tcation of the facts. Sd./- ,^aMohanShfivasia^ Judge 1