HIGH COURT OF CHHAT‘TISGARH AT BILASPUR WRET PETiTiQM {S} Na. 389? of 2997 'Yadumani Patei S/o Manikram Patei. aged abcut 48 years, Assistant Teacher, Government Primaly Schooi-Kosamanda, B!cck-Pussoure, Tahsil & District-Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS RESPCNDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Director. PubHc insiruction, D.K,S. Bhawan, Reipur (C.G.) 3. The District Education Officer, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) .Block Education Officer, Biock—Pusour, District Raigarh (C.G.) PETiTiGNER: ‘WRIT PETiTlON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF lNDiA $ingie Eenc'h : Honibie Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri Present: Shri Sanjay Paiei, Advocate for the petitioner. ‘ $mt. Anju Ahuja, Dy; Govt. Advocate for the respondents/$tate. ORDER (Passed on this 11“ clay of Juiy, 2007) Tne question cf iaw invoived herein is asto whether the petitioner is eniitied to regular pay scaie W.e.f. the date of initial appointment or from the date oi completion of probation period. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as for the respondentsiState jointly submit that the faots and question of law involved in the present writ petition are the same to that of in WP. (S) No. 5976/2006 (Sushll Tiwari and others vs. State Government of Chhattisgarh and others), which was allowed vicie order dated T31 'l .2006. in View of the above—stated submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, the writ petition is allowed in the same terms, subject to verification of the facts. No order as to costs. Bi—