Madhya Pradesh High Court
Balram vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 November, 2022
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA
ON THE 30th OF NOVEMBER, 2022
WRIT PETITION NO.24671 OF 2021
Between:-
BALRAM S/O LATE SHRI
PARICHITA, AGED 51 YEARS,
OCCUPATION PUMP DRIVER, R/O
57 B ANUPAM NAGAR, CITY
CENTER, GWALIOR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
........PETITIONER
(BY SHRI DEVESH SHARMA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, PUBLIC HEALTH
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT,
VALLABH BHAVAN, BHOPAL,
(MADHYA PRADESH).
2. CHIEF ENGINEER, PUBLIC
HEALTH ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT, NEAR WATER
TANK, MORAR, GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC
HEALTH ENGINEERING
2
DEPARTMENT, MAINTENANCE,
DIVISION NO.1, LASHKAR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI SANJAY KUMAR SHARMA - GOVERNMENT
ADVOCATE)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This petition coming on for hearing this day, the Court passed the
following:
ORDER
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has
been filed seeking following reliefs :
7.1 That, the impugned action and order of
respondents dt.19/05/2017 Annexure P/1 may kindly
be declared as illegal and the same may kindly be
quashed.
7.2 That, a direction may kindly be given to the
respondents to give the service benefit and pay scale of
the post of the permanent classified Pump Driver from
the date of his classification as permanent employee to
the petitioner. And pay the arrears of salary on fixation
of pay along with all consequence benefits with interest
from the date of his Classification.
7.3 That, the respondents may further be
directed to implement the direction/order passed by the
Hon'ble High Court, in W.P/2708/2015, dated
12.05.2015.
7.4 That, the respondents may further be
directed to treat the petitioner at par with their similarly
placed co-employees with seniority and consequential
benefits on the post of Pump Driver from the date of his
Classification.
7.5 That, any other relief, which this Hon'ble
Court may deem fit and proper may also be given to the
petitioner along with costs.
By impugned order dated 19.5.2017 classification order issued in
favour of the petitioner has been cancelled. It is submitted by the counsel
for the petitioner that this petition is covered by judgment dated
26.08.2021 passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.
No.4018/2020 (Kamta Prasad Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and
others). The said order was challenged by the State by filing W.A.
No.1166/2021 which too has been dismissed by the Division Bench of
this Court by order dated 03.03.2022 and the order passed by the Writ
Court was maintained except the cost which was imposed. Thus, it is
submitted that in the light of the order passed in the case of Kamta
Prasad (supra), the impugned order of cancellation of classification
order is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, counsel for the State could not point out any
distinguishable aspects and also admitted that the case in hand is duly
covered by order passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of
Kamta Prasad (supra).
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
The controversy involved in the present case is duly covered by the
order passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Kamta
Prasad (supra). The order of classification of the petitioner was also
cancelled after a direction was given to decide the representation for
extending the benefit of minimum of pay scale as directed by the
Supreme Court in the case of Ram Naresh Rawat Vs. Ashwini Ray and
others reported in (2017) 3 SCC 436.
In absence of any distinguishable features, this petition is also
allowed in the terms and conditions of the order dated 26.08.2021 passed
in W.P. No.4018/2020 and the impugned order dated 19.5.2017 by which
the classification order of the petitioner was cancelled is hereby quashed.
No order as to cost.
(G.S. AHLUWALIA)
JUDGE
(alok)
ALOK KUMAR
2022.12.02 17:19:06 +05'30'
