Madhya Pradesh High Court
Govardhan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 November, 2022
Author: Nandita Dubey
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE NANDITA DUBEY
ON THE 25th OF NOVEMBER, 2022
WRIT PETITION No. 22842 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
1. GOVARDHAN S/O NARAYAN TIPOLIYA, AGED
ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCCUPATION: GOVERNMENT
SERVANT GAJNI KHANA DHAR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. KARAN SINGH S/O TAKHT SINGH, AGED ABOUT
53 YEARS, OCCUPATION: GOVERNMENT
SERVANT PHE COLONY RAJGARH DHAR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. BHARAT S/O CHAMPALAL JOSHI, AGED ABOUT
52 YEARS, OCCUPATION: GOVERNMENT
SERVANT GANDHI MARG DHAR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. MAGAR S/O DARIYAV RAWAT, AGED ABOUT 65
Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: RETIRED VILLAGE
TIEMRNI MANAWAR DHAR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
5. DOMSINGH S/O BHAWASINGH MUVEL, AGED
ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED
VILLAGE TIEMRNI MANAWAR DHAR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
6. KISHOR S/O BHARTA KANASIYA, AGED ABOUT
62 YEARS, OCCUPATION: GOVERNMENT
SERVANT VILLAGE TIEMRNI MANAWAR DHAR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
7. OMPRAKASH S/O RAMESHWAR KUSHWAH,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
GOVERNMENT SERVANT SHRI KRISHNA
NAGAR, DHAR. (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
8. DILIP S/O POONAMCHAND HAROD, AGED
SAN SOUMYA RANJAN
DALAI
Date: 2022.11.25
ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCCUPATION: GOVERNMENT
17:28:04 IST
SERVANT NAUGAON, DHAR. (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2
9. JAGDISH S/O MAYARAM RATHORE, AGED
ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCCUPATION: GOVERNMENT
SERVANT MADHUBAN COLONY, MANWAR
DHAR. (MADHYA PRADESH)
10. BHAWARLAL S/O MUNNALAL, AGED ABOUT 52
YEARS, OCCUPATION: GOVERNMENT SERVANT
P.H.E. DHAR . (MADHYA PRADESH)
11. AMAR S/O THAWAR SINGH, AGED ABOUT 58
YEARS, OCCUPATION: GOVERNMENT SERVANT
P.H.E. DHAR. (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(SHRI RISHI TIWARI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
PETITIONERS)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH SECRETARY
PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
(PHE) VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. ENGINEER IN CHIEF PUBLIC HEALTH
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT BANGANGA, JAL
SANSADHAN BHAWAN, BANGANGA, BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT INDORE REGION,
RACE COURSE ROAD. INDORE. (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DHAR DIVISION,
DHAR. (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ALIRAJPUR
DIVISION, (MADHYA PRADESH)
6. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT SRDARPUR
DIVISION, DISTRICT DHAR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
SAN SOUMYA RANJAN
DALAI
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI KOUSTUBH PATHAK, LEARNED G.A. FOR THE
Date: 2022.11.25
17:28:04 IST
RESPONDENTS/STATE)
3
T h is petition coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
following:
ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were Daily
Wagers, thereafter classified as permanent employee in the year 2003, however,
the benefit of the salary of permanent employee has not been extended to them.
The issue involved in this case is squarely covered by the decision of the
Coordinate Bench of this Court passed in Conc No.2693/2019 (Pushpa
Koranne & others vs. Sanjay Shukla & Ors.) on 15.2.2022 and other
connected matters.
On the last date, this Court has directed the Counsel for the
respondents/State to see as to whether the present case is covered by the order
passed in the Contempt Petition No.2693/2019. A copy of the contempt
petition is already on record vide Annexure P/6.
Learned counsel for the State fairly submits that the matter is squarely
covered by the decision in the said contempt petition.
The order passed in Conc No.2693/2019 (Pushpa Koranne & others
vs. Sanjay Shukla & Ors.) reads as under:-
''By order dated 1.7.2021, this Court has held that all the
respondents/contemnors have committed contempt of
this Court by not giving benefits to the petitioners in
pursuant to order dated 14.9.2016 passed by this Court
in W.P. No.1538/2016. They were directed to remain
personally present before this Court by issuing a show-
cause notice as to why they be not punished for
committing contempt of this Court.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
SAN SOUMYA RANJAN
DALAI
perused the record.
Date: 2022.11.25
On 23.8.2021, learned Addl. Advocate General has
17:28:04 IST
appeared with Shri Malay Shrivastava, Principal
Secretary, and submitted that the Department has taken a
decision to settle all the disputes pertaining to
classification and confirmation of the permanent status
of all Class IV employees irrespective of the fact that
they have filed the writ petition or not. It is further
submitted that since there are huge financial implications
in respect of grant of benefits to 1,000 similarly placed
employees all over the State of M.P., hence the matter
has been placed before the Cabinet of State Government
for necessary approval.
Now a compliance report has been filed. All the
respondents have taken common defence in contempt
petition that since last two years, the entire country is
facing the Corona epidemic and all the Departments are
not functioning with full strength, therefore, the delay has
been caused in compliance of the order, which is bona
fide in nature. It is further submitted that 447 cases have
been examined and out of which 121 employees have
been given the benefit by paying them Rs.4.5 Crores. So
far as remaining employees are concerned, the Cabinet
has decided to give the benefit to them in the light of
judgment passed by Apex Court in the case of Ram
Naresh Rawat V/s. Ashwini Ray : (2016) 8 SCC 733. It
is further submitted by the learned counsel for those
daily rated employees who have not approached this
Court, are also being given the benefit in the light of the
aforesaid Judgment of the Apex Court. The Cabinet has
also approved for payment of arrears after confirmation
who have retired or died by paying Rs.30.00 Crores. In
five regions 447 cases have been examined and out of
which in 361 cases employees have been received the
benefits. The current status of the cases after the order
of approval dated 12.10.2021 has been annexed with the
compliance report.
Shri Bhargava learned Addl. Advocate General submits
that every contemnor is taking serious effort to grant the
benefit to the petitioners as well as to all similarly placed
employees. He submits that there is a delay in
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
SAN SOUMYA RANJAN
DALAI
compliance with the Court order for which he has no
Date: 2022.11.25
17:28:04 IST explanation to offer, for which an unconditional apology
is being submitted to this court. As there is a delay in
compliance with the order of this Court for payment of
benefits to the petitioners, hence the Department has
decided to give benefit to all the similarly placed
employees whether they have approached this Court or
not. Looking at the above, the matter was put up before
the Cabinet as there is a huge financial impact on the
state as it is a case of 1,000 employees in a number.
This Court is not satisfied with the aforesaid explanation.
These contempt petitions are filed in respect of a few
employees whose case had attained finality up to the
Supreme Court for them only the Executive Engineer or
superintendent engineer is a competent authority. Despite
the order had been passed in favour of the petitioners in
the year 2018, the benefit has not yet been granted to
them. All the respondents/contemnors are trying to
justify that the Finance Department was not granting
approval, or the matter has been placed before the
Cabinet for necessary approval. Once the judgment has
been passed by this Court in these cases, neither the
Cabinet nor the Finance Department can raise any
objection, or they can sit over the judgment passed by
this Court. No approval from the cabinet or finance
department is necessary. Even for the sake of argument,
any approval is required that ought to have been taken
within a reasonable time. All the writ petitioners are
varied low paid employees they are at the mercy of the
department, but they are being given step treatment. For
extending them monetary benefits to these petitioners for
which they are legally entitled the respondents are taking
defence that it would cause an extra heavy financial
burden on the state. These petitioners are doing the work
of regular employees of the department for the last 20
years and getting a fixed amount of salary which is very
low as compared to regular pay scales, rather they have
saved crores of rupees of the Government.
So far as implementation of the judgment passed in the
case of Ram Naresh Rawat (supra) is concerned, the
said judgment is passed by the Apex Court. Irrespective
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
SAN SOUMYA RANJAN
DALAI
of the financial implication, the benefit is liable to be
Date: 2022.11.25
17:28:04 IST given to the employees and for which no decision of
Cabinet or the Finance Department is necessary. These
are lame excuses in order to save from the contempt
proceedings. The only valid justification given by the
respondents can be considered in these contempt
petitions can be considered is that, apart from the
petitioners, the Department has decided to review all the
cases of other similarly situated employees also without
insisting them to approach this court, this would save the
Court's precious time. Only this bonafide effort can save
them from the punishment in these contempt petitions.
Given the above, these contempt petitions are disposed
of by accepting their unconditional apology at this stage
only on the condition that in the next three months, there
shall be no case pending of any class IV employees for
confirmation of permanent status and payment of arrears
of these petitioners as well as to other similarly placed
employees. After three months, they shall file an affidavit
about the above compliance. In the failure of filing such
an affidavit, the Principal Registrar of this Bench is
directed to list all the contempt petitions before this
Court again. It is made clear that after three months in
case of non-compliance, no respondent/contemnor shall
be given any further opportunity of hearing before
imposing any punishment by this court.''
In view of the aforesaid, this petition also stands disposed off in terms of
the order dated 15.02.2022 passed in Conc. No.2693/2019. The directions as
contained therein shall be made applicable mutatis mutandis to the facts and
circumstances of the present case and the same benefit be extended to the
present petitioners also.
CC as per rules.
(NANDITA DUBEY)
JUDGE
soumya
Signature Not Verified
VerifiedDigitally
Digitally signed by
SAN SOUMYA RANJAN
DALAI
Date: 2022.11.25
17:28:04 IST
