Madhya Pradesh High Court
Raheem Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 September, 2021
Author: Vishal Mishra
1 WP-20608-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
WP-20608-2021
(RAHEEM KHAN AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
1
Jabalpur, Dated : 28-09-2021
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri Raunak Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Shri Ankit Agrawal, learned Government Advocate for the
respondents/State.
Petition has been filed seeking following relief:-
"(i) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus,
respondents may kindly be directed to give the benefit of
order passed in case of similarly situated employee i.e. in
wp no 16054/2003 and wp no 16741/2003 (Annexure P/2).
(ii) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus
respondent may kindly be directed to grant the benefit of pay
scale of rupees 515-800 with effect from 01/04/1982, the
benefit of pay scale of rupees 950-1530 with effect from
01/01/1986 and the benefit of pay scale of rupees 3050-4590
with effect from 01/01/1996 and to revise and refixe their
salary, calculate the entire arrears of salary and to pay the
said amount to the petitioners.
(iii) Any other writ or direction as the Hon'ble Court
may deem fit in the circumstances of the case."
It is submitted by the counsel appearing for the petitioners that the
controversy has been settled by this Court in W.P.No.16054/2003 passed in
the case of A.L.Thakur Vs. State of M.P. and Others and stated that it has
attained finality to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is submitted that petitioners
are identically situated therefore, they claim similar relief to be extended to the
petitioners also. He has relied upon the judgment passed in the case of
RK.Lakhera and others Vs. State of M.P. and others passed in W.P.
No.13540/2010 decided on 13.12.2012 which has attained finality of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court as SLP has been dismissed on 09.10.2015. It is
pointed out that a detailed representation has already been preferred by the
Signature Not petitioners but the same was kept pending and not yet decided by the
SAN
Verified
Digitally signed by
SMT SHALINI
SINGH LANDGE
Date: 2021.09.29
10:31:21 IST
2 WP-20608-2021
respondent authorities. An innocuous prayer has been made to direct the
authorities to consider and decide the pending representation of the
petitioners and if the petitioners are found eligible, benefits be extended to
them.
Counsel for the State has no objection to the innocuous prayer made
by the petitioners and they submits that if a fresh representation is filed by the
petitioners same will be considered and decided within a stipulated time
frame.
Keeping in view the aforesaid submissions made by the counsel for the
parties and also keeping in view the overall facts and circumstances of the
case, this Court deems it fit to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to
the petitioners to file a fresh representation to respondents no.2 and 3 within 7
working days and if such a representation is filed, same may be considered
and decided within 15 days from receipt of certified copy of this order by
passing a self contained speaking order and communicate the out come to the
petitioners within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of the certified
copy of this order.
Needless to mention that this court has not expressed any opinion on
the merits of the case.
With the aforesaid observations, this petition is disposed of with no
order as to the cost.
CC as per rules.
(VISHAL MISHRA)
JUDGE
Sha
Signature
SAN Not
Verified
Digitally signed by
SMT SHALINI
SINGH LANDGE
Date: 2021.09.29
10:31:21 IST
