Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Sumanlata Rai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 August, 2023
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
ON THE 14 th OF AUGUST, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 12967 of 2018
BETWEEN:-
SMT. SUMANLATA RAI W/O LATE SHRI SANTOSH
KUMAR RAI, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
HOUSE WIFE R/O. NEAR PANI KE TANKEE TOWN HALL
JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI RAM GOPAL RAI - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY P.H.E. DEPT. VALLABH
BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. ENGINEER IN CHIEF PUBLIC HEALTH
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT JAL BHAWAN,
VANGANGA ROAD, (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERING
DEPARTM ENT NEAR DAMOHNAKA, JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT NEAR
DAMOHNAKA, JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI K.V.S. SUNIL RAO - PANEL LAWYER)
This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that challenge in this petition
is to an order dated 10.07.2017 (Annexure P/6) by which, the representation of
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SAVITRI PATEL
Signing time: 8/17/2023
3:57:03 PM
the petitioner as regards the benefit of "Kramonnati Vetanman" was rejected
while taking recourse to cut-off-date mentioned in Circular dated 21.09.2016
issued by the Department of Finance, Bhopal.
2. It is contended by the counsel for the petitioner that the Circular
dated 21.09.2016, to the extent of cut-off-date, has already been quashed by the
Indore Bench of this Court vide an order dated 16.05.2018 passed in
W.P.No.461/2018 (Gendalal and Ors vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and
Ors.). It is further contended by the counsel for the petitioner that the order
passed in W.P.No. 461/2018 Gendalal and Ors (supra) dated 16.05.2018 was
assailed by the State by filing a Writ Appeal No.1229/2018 which has also been
dismissed by Division Bench, Indore of this Court on 13.10.2022. Accordingly,
counsel submits that the in view of the decision of Division Bench of Indore
Bench of this Court, the impugned order deserves to be set-aside.
3. Per-contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State submits that
the benefit to the petitioner was declined while taking into consideration the
Circular dated 21.09.2016. It is contended by the counsel for the respondent
that the petition has been filed at a belated stage inasmuch as, the petitioner is
claiming the benefit with a retrospective effect. However, the counsel for the
respondent is not in a position to demonstrate as to how the order passed by
this Court in case of W.P.No. 461/2018 Gendalal and Ors (supra) dated
16.05.2018 is not applicable to the case of petitioner.
4. Heard the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the
record.
5. A perusal of the impugned order reflects that the claim of the
petitioner as regards the extension of benefit of "Kramonnati Vetanman" was
declined while taking into consideration the cut-off-date i.e. 01.01.2016 and it
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SAVITRI PATEL
Signing time: 8/17/2023
3:57:03 PM
was observed that as the husband of the petitioner expired on 20.07.2009,
therefore, the petitioner was not entitled for the benefit of "Kramonnati
Vetanman". The said Circular dated 21.09.2016 was taken note of by this
Court in the case of W.P.No. 461/2018 Gendalal and Ors (supra) dated
16.05.2018 and this Court has held as under:-
"The another important aspect of the matter is that the State
Government has issued circular on 21.09.2016 granting the benefit
to the work charged contingency paid establishment w.e.f.
01.01.2016. The executive instructions issued by the State
Government cannot supersede the judgment delivered by this
Court, which has attained finality and, therefore, the executive
instructions issued by the State Government to the extent the cut-of-
date has been fixed is hereby quashed. The petitioners shall be
entitled for all consequential benefits, which have been extended to
Tejulal Yadav (supra) on account of the order passed by this Court.
The petitioners shall be entitled for Kramonnati w.e.f. 2003 and
time bound pay-scale w.e.f. 2013. The petitioners shall also be
entitled for monetary benefits and arrears for the above period.
The exercise of passing an appropriate order granting the benefits
be concluded within a period of six months from the date of receipt
of certified copy of this order."
(emphasis supplied)
6. If the impugned order dated 10.07.2017 contained in Annexure
P/6 is subjected to scrutiny on the basis of law laid down by this Court in the
case of W.P.No. 461/2018 Gendalal and Others (supra) dated 16.05.2018, it
would reveal that the impugned order is unsustainable as the petitioner's claim
was rejected on the basis of cut-off-date i.e. 01.01.2016. Accordingly, the
present petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 10.07.2017 contained
in Annexure P/6 stands quashed.
7. The respondents are directed to extend the benefit of
"Kramonnati Vetanman" to the petitioner form the due date and entire
consequential benefits be calculated and paid to the petitioner within a period of
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SAVITRI PATEL
Signing time: 8/17/2023
3:57:03 PM
90 days from the date of production of certified copy of the order passed
today, failing which, the benefits shall incur interest at the rate of 6% per annum
to the petitioner.
8. With the aforesaid, the present petition stands allowed.
(MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE
sp
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SAVITRI PATEL
Signing time: 8/17/2023
3:57:03 PM
