Mahesh Kumar Singh vs The State Of M.P.
2021 Latest Caselaw 6318 MP

                                                          1                                 WP-20070-2021
                              The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                         WP-20070-2021
                                     (MAHESH KUMAR SINGH Vs THE STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS)

                      1
                      Jabalpur, Dated : 01-10-2021
                            Heard through Video Conferencing.
                            Shri Dharmendra Patel, learned counsel for the petitioner.
                            Shri S.K.Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State.

The present petition is being filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :-

"I. To call for entire relevant record.

II. To quashed the impugned order dated 13.10.2008, and further be pleased to direct the respondents to extend the benefit of second kramonnati to petitioner w.e.f.19.04.1999 in place of 08.01.2003 and accordingly revise the retiral benefit and pension.

III. To direct the respondents to pay the arrears of salary and pension with 12% interest and be pleased further direct to give other consequential benefit as per time bound scheme to the petitioners.

IV. To pass such any other order as deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case and any other relief together cost of the petition."

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher in the Department of School Education on 19.07.1974. The services of the petitioner was regularized on 07.01.1997 and the benefit of regular pay scale was extended to the petitioner. The petitioner has completed 24 years of service on 26.07.1998 but the respondent/authorities granted the benefit of second kramonnati w.e.f. 08.01.2003 whereas, the petitioner is entitled to get the benefit of second kramonnati w.e.f. 19.04.1999. The respondents issued a circular dated 03.09.2005 and the benefit of Second Kramonnati Yojna w.e.f. 19.04.1999 has been changed to 01.08.2003. The order dated 03.09.2005 was quashed by this 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 Signature SAN Not Verified

Digitally signed by SMT SHALINI SINGH LANDGE Date: 2021.10.02 12:12:48 IST 2 WP-20070-2021 26.04.2007 and Departmental authority also issued the circular order for grant of above benefit. The petitioner requested and submitted claim for granting above benefit/claim before the departmental authority. Duty performance of petitioner was satisfactory to all concerned especially immediate superior authorities and at no point of time the petitioner was communicated with any adverse remark. The service record of the petitioner is crystal clear.

It is further submitted that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment of Smt. Prerna Koranne (supra). Thereafter, so many orders have been passed by the Courts 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 he was entitled w.e.f. 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 petitioner has 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 petitioner to the concerning authorities, they will consider the grievance of the petitioner 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 the petitioner to file a 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 petitioner is similarly situated or not.

Signature
 SAN      Not
Verified

Digitally signed by
SMT SHALINI
SINGH LANDGE
Date: 2021.10.02
12:12:48 IST
                                                            3                          WP-20070-2021

If the said authorities come to the conclusion that the petitioner is similarly situated, the same benefit be extended in favour of the present petitioner 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)
                                                                                  JUDGE


                      Sha




Signature
 SAN      Not
Verified

Digitally signed by
SMT SHALINI
SINGH LANDGE
Date: 2021.10.02
12:12:48 IST