Madhya Pradesh High Court
Somsingh Ninama vs Dr. Pallavi Jain on 13 June, 2022
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
ON THE 13th OF JUNE, 2022
CONTEMPT PETITION CIVIL No. 1529 of 2021
Between:-
SOMSINGH NINAMA S/O LATE SRI KALSINGH
NINAMA , AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: ASST. TEACHER VILL-GOMALA,
PO. ROTALA TEH. RAMA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI U.S. VERMA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. DR. PALLAVI JAIN PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. SHRI SANJEEV SINGH COMMISSIONER
DEPARTMENT OF TRIBAL WORKS SATPUDA
BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. SHRI SOMESH MISHRA THE COLLECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF TRIBAL WORKS JHABUA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. SHRI PRASHANT ARYA THE ASST.
COM M ISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF TRIBAL
WORKS JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. SHRI SHANKARLAL SIROTHIYA BLOCK
EDUCATION OFFICER BLOCK RAMA DIST
JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)
6. SHRI SHANKARLAL SIROTHIYA THE
P R I N C I PA L GOVT. HIGHER SECONDARY
S C H O O L KHARADUBADI TEH RAMA DIST
JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
SAN SOURABH YADAV
.....RESPONDENTS
Date: 2022.06.13
17:58:04 IST
T h is petition coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
2
following:
ORDER
This contempt petition filed under section 12 of the Contempt of Courts
Act and Article 215 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the non-
compliance of the order dated 01.03.2005 passed by this Court in WP
No.4484/2003.
The said writ petition was disposed off with a direction to the
respondents to consider and decide the representations. It is further directed
that if it is found that the applicants are eligible to draw salary in the regular pay
scale of Rs.1200-2040 then their salary may be accordingly fixed. It was further
directed that the respondents shall also consider whether the applicant are
entitled to get the salary in the pay scale revised from time to time from 1981.
With the aforesaid directions, the present petition was disposed off.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the other petitioners
namely Ramsingh, Gajrajsingh and Keswarsingh have been granted pay scale in
the year 2010 by the order dated 15.02.2010 Annexure P/3 and P/4. It is
submitted that the case of the petitioner has not been examined and he has not
been extended the benefit.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the limitation
would not apply in the case of contempt in the light of the judgment passed by
the Division Bench in the case of Sanman Singh Vs. Sumer Singh reported
in 2012 (3) MPLJ 717.
In view of the aforesaid, the present petition is disposed off with a
direction to the Collector (Tribal and Development), Jhabua to consider and
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
examine the case of the petitioner also in the light of the order dated 01.03.2005
SAN SOURABH YADAV
Date: 2022.06.13
17:58:04 IST
passed in WP No.4484/2003 and taking into consideration the fact that the
similarly situated petitioners have been extended the benefit of pay scale as
directed by this court.
The petitioner shall submit a detailed and comprehensive representation
before the Collector (Tribal and Development), Jhabua within the period of
three weeks from today and in case if such representation is submitted within
the aforesaid period alongwith the copy of the order passed today, the same
shall be considered and examined by the said respondent in accordance with
the law as per the direction dated 01.03.2005 passed in WP No.4484/2003
within the period of two months from the date of filling of the representation.
With the aforesaisd, the present petition stands disposed off.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
JUDGE
Sourabh
Signature Not Verified
VerifiedDigitally
Digitally signed by
SAN SOURABH YADAV
Date: 2022.06.13
17:58:04 IST
