Ramesh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 6383 MP

                                  1
 IN    THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                       AT GWALIOR
                         BEFORE
       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
                      ON THE 20 th OF APRIL, 2023
                   WRIT PETITION No. 8811 of 2023

BETWEEN:-
RAMESH S/O LATE SHRI BHOGIRAM, AGED ABOUT 65
YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED LABOUR BERKHEDA
HAT GUNA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                               .....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI DEVESH SHARMA - ADVOCATE)

AND
1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
      PRINCIPAL  SECRETARY, PUBLIC  WORKS
      DEPARTMENT, VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL
      (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.    ENGINEER   IN     CHIEF  PUBLIC WORKS
      D EPARTM EN T 27-28 FIRT FLOOR NIRMAN
      BHAWAN ARERA HILLS BHOPAL (MADHYA
      PRADESH)

3.    CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
      NORTH ZONES THATIPUR, GWALIOR (MADHYA
      PRADESH)

4.    SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS
      D E PA R T M E N T MANDAL GUNA (MADHYA
      PRADESH)

                                                            .....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI VIVEK KHEKDEAR - ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)

      Th is petition coming on for admission this day, JUSTICE MILIND
RAMESH PHADKE passed the following:
                                   ORDER

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has bee filed

seeking following reliefs:

7.1 That, a direction may kindly be given to the respondents to give the service benefit and minimum pay scale of the post of the permanent classified Labour 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.

7.2 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 Labour from the date of his Classification. 7 . 3 That, any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper may also be given to the petitioner along with costs.

It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that petitioner was employed as daily wages as Labour in the respondents department. He was classified as permanent employee on the post of Labour by order dated 24.04.2013. It is further submitted that now he has been declared as Sthaikarmi. However, in the light of judgment passed by Supreme Court in the case of Ram Naresh Rawat Vs. Ashwini Ray reported in 2017 (3) SCC 436, the benefit of minimum of regular pay scale without increment from the date of classification till extension of benefit of Sthaikarmi has not been paid and accordingly, it is submitted that the petitioner is entitled for the minimum of regular pay scale without increment for the aforementioned period.

Per contra, it is submitted by the counsel for the State that the petitioner is entitled for the minimum of the regular pay scale without increment from the date of his classification only.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner was classified by order dated 19.06.2008. Accordingly, if

the classification is intact and if he files a representation before the authorities for grant of minimum pay scale from 24.04.2013 till the benefit of Sthaikarmi is given to him, then the said representation shall be decided as early as possible preferably within a period of one month from the date of representation in the light of judgment passed in the case of Ram Naresh Rawat (supra).

With the aforesaid direction, the petition is finally disposed of.

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE ar

ABDUR RAHMAN 2023.04.21 10:55:44 +05'30'