Bhay Singh Dawar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4244 MP

                                 1

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          AT INDORE
                           BEFORE
             HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA

                   ON THE 26th OF MARCH, 2022

                 WRIT PETITION No. 7099 of 2022

     Between:-
     BHAY SINGH DAWAR S/O SHRI SHIVJI DAWAR,
     AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
     OCCUPATION: SERVICE,
     GOVT. S.C.S.T. GIRLS HOSTEL REBADADA, BLOCK DAHI
     (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                .....PETITIONER
     (BY SHRI SANTOSH PANDEY, ADVOCATE)

     AND

     THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH,
     PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
1.   TRIBAL WORK (DEVELOPMENT) DEPARMENT,
     VALLABH BHAWAN,
     BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
     COMMISSIONER,
     TRIBAL WORK DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
2.
     VINDHYACHAL BHAWAN
     (MADHYA PRADESH)
     ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
3.   TRIBAL WORK DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
     DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
     JOINT DIRECTOR TREASURY,
     ACCOUNTS AND PENSION,
4.
     KOTHARI MARKET,
     INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                              .....RESPONDENTS
     (BY SHRI NITIN BHATI, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

        This petition coming on for admission this day, the court

passed the following:
                                    2

                              ORDER

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

2. 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.

3. 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 v. State of Madhya Pradesh & others in Original Application No.2745/1989 on 24.08.1992 and followed in various cases by this Court. The SLP No.6092/1993 preferred against this order was dismissed by the Supreme Court.

4. The prayer is not opposed by the State's counsel.

5. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of 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 / she 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.

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

7. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed off.

(Pranay Verma) Judge

Aiyer* Digitally signed by JAGDISHAN AIYER Date: 2022.03.26 17:25:18 +05'30'