Smt. Uma Gupta vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3477 MP

                           1
              HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                           WP.No.16142/2019
    (Smt. Uma Gupta & Others Vs. The State of M.P. & Others)

Gwalior, Dated : 20.07.2021

      Shri Nakul Khedkar, learned counsel for the petitioners.

      Shri Ajay Raghuvanshi, learned Panel Lawyer for the State.

      Heard through Video Conferencing.

      The present petition is being filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India seeking following reliefs:-

           "(i). That the respondents may kindly be

directed to give similar benefit of second kromonnati to the petitioners w.e.f. 19.04.1999 and also refix the pay and pension and other allowances for payment of difference of arrears of salary with interest and other service benefit be also revised accordingly with the interest till the date of payment.

(ii). That any other relief to which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit may also be directed to be extended in favour of the petitioners in the interest of justice. Costs of this petition may also awarded in favour of the petitioners."

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the

petitioners were appointed as Assistant Teacher in the department of

School Education in various institute. Recently on 22.05.2019 and

03.05.2018, the District Education Officer, Gwalior/the respondent

no.2 issued the order and change of initial date of appointment and

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH WP.No.16142/2019 (Smt. Uma Gupta & Others Vs. The State of M.P. & Others)

grant of regular pay scale from the date of initial appointment. So the

petitioners are entitled for second kramonnati w.e.f. 19.04.1999.

Departmental authority is not considering the case of the petitioners

w.e.f. 19.04.1999 for granting second kramonnati pay scale

5500-175-9000. The petitioners were entitled for the sanction of

second kramonnati having completed 24 years service in the cadre of

Assistant Teacher. The petitioners were entitled for the second time

bound promotion w.e.f. 19.04.1999 as per the circulars of respondent/

State and Departmental authority dated 02.11.2001, 01.06.2002 and

11.10.2006. But the petitioners have not been granted the same

benefit but similar persons have also been benefited the same relief

from 19.04.1999. The respondents/State issued an order dated

03.09.2005 and the benefit of Second Lramonnati Yojna w.e.f.

19.04.1999 has been changed on 01.08.2003. The order dated

03.09.2005 (Annexure P/3) was quashed by the Hon'ble Court in the

case of Smt. Prerna Koranne w/o Shri Pramod Koranne v. State

of M.P. and others, in W.P. No.6773/2006, decided on 26.04.07 by

the Hon'ble High Court and Departmental authority also issued the

circular order for grant of above benefit. The petitioners requested

and submitted claim for granting above benefit/claim before the

departmental authority. Duty performance of petitioners was

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH WP.No.16142/2019 (Smt. Uma Gupta & Others Vs. The State of M.P. & Others)

satisfactory to all concerned especially immediate superior authorities

and at no point of time the petitioners were communicated with any

adverse remark. The service record of the petitioners is crystal clear.

It is further submitted that the case of the petitioners is squarely

covered by the judgment of Smt. Prerna Koranne (supra). Thereafter,

so many orders have been passed by the Hon'ble Court in the light of

judgment of Smt. Prerna Koranne (supra). Thus, a direction may be

given to the respondents to grant the second time bound promotion to

the petitioners for which they were entitled on 19.04.1999 for the post

of Assistant Teacher cadre and for payment of difference of pay scale

and allowances and revise the other benefits consequence to the

second time bound promotion. Being aggrieved with action/inaction

on the part of the respondents, the petitioners have no option except

to file the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India, hence, the present petition is being filed.

Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer for the State has submitted

that if fresh representation is submitted by the petitioners to the

concerning authorities, they will consider the grievances of the

petitioners and settle the dispute.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court

deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH WP.No.16142/2019 (Smt. Uma Gupta & Others Vs. The State of M.P. & Others)

the petitioners to file fresh representation alongwith the judgment of

Prerna Koranne (supra) to the concerning authorities within a period

of seven working days and in turn if such a representation is filed, the

concerning authorities are directed to consider and decide the

representation within a period of three months from the date of

receipt of the certified copy of this order therefrom in accordance

with rules by taking into account the judgment in Prerna Koranne's

case and examine whether the petitioners are similarly situated or not.

If the said authorities come to the conclusion that the petitioners are

similarly situated, the same benefit be extended in favour of the

present petitioners also within the same time.

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.

Needless to say that this Court has not commented upon the

merits of the case.

E-copy of this order be provided to the petitioner and it is made

clear that E-copy of this order shall be treated as certified copy for

practical purposes in respect of this order.

                                                 (Vishal Mishra)
AK/-                                                 Judge
        ANAND KUMAR
        2021.07.20
        16:51:02 +05'30'