Panchayat And Rural Development ... vs Mahendra Kumar Joshi
2023 Latest Caselaw 13108 MP

                                1
       IN THE   HIGH COURT        OF MADHYA PRADESH

                        AT I N D O R E
                          BEFORE
   HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
                              &
            HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA

                 ON THE 11th OF AUGUST, 2023

                  WRIT APPEAL No. 478 of 2020

BETWEEN:-
   PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
   DEPARTMENT     PRINCIPAL    SECRETARY
1.
   VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA
   PRADESH)
   DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT
2. EVAM GRAMIN VIKASH VIBHAG VALLABH
   BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
   CHIEF    EXECUTIVE     OFFICER    JILA
3. PANCHAYAT , DHAR JILA PANCHAYAT, DHAR
   (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                .....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI BHUWAN GAUTAM - GOVT. ADVOCATE)
AND
MAHENDRA    KUMAR    JOSHI S/O   SHRI
BHERULAL JOSHI, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: ASSISTANT GRADE 2. R/O.148,
BASANT VIHAR COLONY DHAR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
                                                .....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI VIJAY KUMAR PATWARI- ADVOCATE



                  WRIT APPEAL No. 476 of 2020

BETWEEN:-
1. PANCHAYAT  AND    RURAL   DEVELOPMENT
   DEPARTMENT PRINCIPAL SECRETARY VALLABH
                                        2
   BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
   VIKAS AYUKT PANCHAYAT AVAM GRAMIN VIKAS
2. VIBHAG VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA
   PRADESH)
   MUKHAY    KARYAPALAN    ADHIKARI    DIST
3.
   PANCHAYAT DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)
   CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER DIST PANCHAYAT
4.
   INDORE MOTI TABELA (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                           .....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI BHUWAN GAUTAM - GOVT. ADVOCATE)
AND
BADRILAL CHOUHAN S/O SHRI AMBARAM JI
CHOUHAN, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
ACCOUNTANT 102, SHRIHARIKRAPA APARTMENT
FUTI KOTHI CHOURAHA INDORE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
                                                           .....RESPONDENT
(NONE)
This appeal coming on for admission this day, JUSTICE SUSHRUT

ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI passed the following:

                                   ORDER

I.A.No.1250/2020 and I.A.No.1245/2020, applications for condonation of delay are taken up.

2. As per Office report, these writ appeals are barred by 42 and 52 days in filing the present writ appeals.

3. The delay is properly explained hence I.A.No.1250/2020 and I.A.No.1245/2020, stand allowed.

4. The delay is hereby condoned.

5. In view of similarity of matter, the matters were analogously heard on admission. The facts are taken from W.A.No.478/2020.

6. In this intra court appeals, the order of learned Single Judge dated 1.11.2019 passed in W.P.No.4298/2018 and order dated 22.10.2019 passed in

W.P.No.4311/2018 are called in question.

7. Shri Bhuwan Gautam, learned Govt. Advocate for the appellants/State submits that the respondents/petitioners were promoted from the post of Assistant Grade III to Assistant Grade II. They also got the benefit of financial upgradation namely Kramonnati. The benefit of FR-22-D was given to them but after realizing that they have already got the benefit of Kramonnati, the same was directed to be withdrawn and consequently recovery was directed to be made for the excess amount arising out of grant of FR-22-D.

8. Learned Govt. Advocate for the appellants submits that after having received the benefit of Kramonnati, the employees were no-more entitled to get the benefit of FR-22-D.

9. No other point is pressed by the learned Govt. Advocate for the appellants/State.

10. The singular point raised is no-more res-integra and has been taken into account by learned Single Judge by following the judgment of Gwalior Bench in Ram Siya Sharma v/s. State of M.P. & Others reported in 2013(1) MPLJ

51. The Gwalior Bench considered the aspect of financial upgradation / Kramonnati and the promotion. After a detail judgment, the Bench opined that grant of benefit of Kramonnati cannot result into denial of benefit of FR-22-D.

11. The judgment of learned Single Judge is based on the judgment of Gwalior Bench in Ram Siya Sharma (supra). The learned Single Judge has taken a plausible view which does not warrant any interference by this court in view of judgment of the Apex Court in Management of Narendra and Company Pvt. Ltd. v/s. Workmen of Narendra and Co. reported in (2016) 3 SCC 340.

12. Writ appeal are devoid of merits. The admission is declined.

13. Accordingly, writ appeals are dismissed.

       (S.A. DHARMADHIKARI)                              (PRANAY VERMA)
              JUDGE                                          JUDGE


SS/-
             Digitally signed by SHAILESH
             MAHADEV SUKHDEVE
             Date: 2023.08.14 17:30:00
             +05'30'