Dhan Singh Ningwal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 2916 MP

                                                                                 1
                                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
                                                                               BEFORE
                                                              HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
                                                                          ON THE 2nd OF MARCH, 2022

                                                                   WRIT PETITION No. 28730 of 2021

                                                     Between:-
                                                     DHAN SINGH NINGWAL S/O SHRI PAHAD SINGH
                                                     NINGWAL , AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                                     SERVICE GOVT. MIDDLE SCHOOL FADTALA
                                                     BLOCK SONDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                              .....PETITIONER
                                                     (BY SHRI SANTOSH PANDEY, ADVOCATE )

                                                     AND

                                            1.       THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL
                                                     SECRETARY   VALLABH  BHAWAN   BHOPAL
                                                     (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                            2.       COMMISSIONER TRIBAL WORK (DEVELOPMENT)
                                                     D E P A R T M E N T VINDHYACHAL BAHWAN
                                                     (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                            3.       ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TRIBAL WORK
                                                     (DEVELOPMENT)    DEPARTMENT ALIRAJPUR
                                                     (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                            4.       JOINT DIRECTOR TREASURY, ACCOUNTS AND
                                                     PENSION DIVISION, KOTHARI MARKET (MADHYA
                                                     PRADESH)

                                                                                                           .....RESPONDENTS
                                                     (BY SHRI MANISH NAIR, DEPUTY ADVOCATE GENERAL )

                                                   T h is petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                                            following:
                                                                                  ORDER

Though matter is posted for admission, however, with consent of counsel for parties, heard finally.

Short grievance of the petitioner in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is that he has not been extended the benefit of regular pay scale from the initial date of appointment.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter is covered by order passed by erstwhile Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal in the case of Madhukant Yadu and 56 others Vs. State of M.P., & others in Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by SAN SOURABH YADAV Date: 2022.03.02 17:50:43 IST

O.A.No.2745/1989 on 24/08/1992 and followed in various cases by this Court.

The prayer is not opposed by the State's counsel. Accordingly, this petition is disposed off in terms of the aforesaid order passed in Madhukant Yadu and 56 others (supra) and the same shall apply mutatis mutandis. The petitioner shall prefer a detailed representation individually

mentioning all the facts, grounds and judgment on which he wants to place reliance and submit the same before the respondents No.2 to 4 within 15 days from today. The said respondents shall be well advised to advert to the representation of the petitioner within 12 (twelve) weeks therefrom in accordance with law. In case the petitioner is entitled for the benefits, the same shall be released within the stipulated period and if found that the petitioner is not entitled for the similar benefit, reasons thereof be communicated to the petitioner.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE Sourabh

Signature Not Verified VerifiedDigitally Digitally signed by SAN SOURABH YADAV Date: 2022.03.02 17:50:43 IST