Sehdev Singh Kushwah vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5635 MP

                                       1
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                           AT GWALIOR
                                WP No. 4222 of 2022
     (SEHDEV SINGH KUSHWAH AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

Dated : 19-04-2022
      Shri Sudhir Singh Tomar, Counsel for the petitioners.

      Shri Pawan Singh Raghuvanshi, Counsel for the State.
      The petitioners have filed the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India seeking following reliefs:-

             "(i) That, the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to
             direct the respondents to allow 1st Kramonnati and

6th & 7th pay arrear benefits in the light of circular issued by the respondents on dated 27.07.2019 and also update the petitioners service book.

(ii). That, the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant any other relief as deems fit in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.

(iii) That, the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to award the entire cost of the petition."

The petitioners have filed the present petition complaining that they have not been given the benefit of first 'Kramonnati' after completion 12 years of their service from the date of their initial appointment.

The petitioners were initially appointed as Shikshakarmi/Guruji. After completion of three years' service, the respondents regularized the petitioners in the year 2007. All the petitioners were absorbed in the teacher cadre in regular pay- scale. The grievance of the petitioners is that the benefit of circular dated 27.07.2019 has not been given to them whereas the same has been extended to their counter parts working in District Dewas and other districts. They have copy of such orders dated 24.02.2020 passed by the District Education Officer, Dewas whereby benefit of first 'Kramonnati' has been granted to the teachers. Learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submitted that the petitioners are ready to prefer fresh representation elaborating all necessary facts and the judgment passed in this regard to the competent authority but only anxiety is that representation be decided as expeditiously as possible.

Learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondent/State has no objection for such a direction.

Accordingly, this petition is disposed off with a direction that the petitioners shall submit a representation within one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, as per the law, elaborating all the necessary facts. If any representation so preferred is being received by the respondents, then the same

shall be considered and decided, in accordance with law, considering all the necessary facts including controversy under due intimation to the petitioners within two months from the date of receipt of the representation.

With the aforesaid, writ petition stands disposed off. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

                                                                                   (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
                                                                                            JUDGE

ar

     ABDUR     Digitally signed by ABDUR RAHMAN

DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=d604b5a66b413c436e6af99c6fe547304e1bc26d2b510cc133f1

RAHMAN b56faa63e77b, pseudonym=352E5BC6169A1C65270B76C8214AD91A9A2E28EB, serialNumber=1B0EA1B496C965067285A628B81AE07B60D342048B785 3E6108263F1DDCC0F50, cn=ABDUR RAHMAN Date: 2022.04.20 10:36:09 +05'30'