Madhya Pradesh High Court
Yagyanarayan Tiwari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 December, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH
ON THE 22 nd OF DECEMBER, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 17370 of 2015
BETWEEN:-
1. YAGYANARAYAN TIWARI S/O SHRI RAMBAL
TIWARI, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
TIME KEEPER W.R.D. SUB DIVISION BEOHARI
DIVISION NO. 2 SHAHDOL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. SUKHLAL KEWAT S/O SHRI RAM KRIPAL KEWAT,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCCUPATION: WORKING
AS KHALASI W.R.D. DISTT. SHAHDOL (M.P.)
3. MADAN LAL S/O SHRI SUKHAI PRASAD KUMHAR,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
CHOWIDAR W.R.D. DISTT. SHAHDOL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. RAM KARAN SINGH BARGHAI S/O SHRI
SAHADEO, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
WORKING AS KHALASI WRD DISTT. SHAHDOL
(M.P.)
5. MAHESH PRASAD KAHAR S/O BHAGWAT PRASAD
KAHAR, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
WORKING AS KHALASI W.R.D DISTT. SHAHDOL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
6. SHANKAR LAL KAHAR S/O SHRI KASHI PRASAD
KAHAR, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
WORKING AS KHALASI W.R.D DISTT. SHAHDOL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
7. PANJAB SINGH S/O VITTA SINGH, AGED ABOUT 47
Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: WORKING AS DOK
RUNNER BEOHARI, DIVISION NO. 2, DISTT.
SHAHDOL (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI S.K.SINGH-ADVOCATE)
AND
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MANZOOR
AHMED
Signing time: 12/23/2023
10:23:21 AM
2
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH SECRETARY,
WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, VALLABH
BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. ENGINEER IN CHIEF WATER RESOURCE
D EPARTM EN T DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. CHIEF ENGINEER (GANGA VALLEY) WATER
RESOURCE DEPARTMENT, DIVISION REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCE
DEPARTMENT, DIVISION NO 2, BEOHARI
DISTRICT SHAHDOL (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. S.D.O. WATER RESOURCE DEPARTMENT
BEOHARI, DIVISION NO.2 DISTT. SHAHDOL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI DEEPAK SAHU-PANEL LAWYER)
Th is petition coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
Perusal of the impugned order dated 6.6.2015 shows that the benefit of
Kramonnati (time bound promotion) is not available to the petitioners, as
according to the instructions dated 18.9.1998 the said relief is available to the
work charged drivers in the government department.
Learned counsel for the petitioners places reliance upon the order dated
23.1.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Teju
Lal Yadav Vs. State of MP & others, ILR [2009] MP 1326 to contend that
the benefit of time bound promotion/kramonnati is available to contingency paid
and work charged employees, as they were considered to be a common class.
The benefit of time bound promotion was extended to the work charged
employees. Teju Lal Yadav's case (supra) was decided on the basis of earlier
judgment dated 7.11.2005 in K.L.Asre Vs. State, WP (S) No.1070/2003,
wherein the benefit of time bound promotion was extended to the employees of
the Work Charge Establishment in the Public Works Department. The same
was not confined to the drivers only, rather the same was applicable to time
keepers and others employees in Public Works Department. Teju Lal Yadav
was a labourer and the benefit of time bound promotion was ordered to be
given to him. The judgment passed in Teju Lal Yadav (supra) has attained
finality and has been implemented. Based on the ratio of Teju Lal Yadav's
case (supra), this Court in WP No.16047/2012 (s) (Veer Singh Thakur and
others Vs. State of MP and others) passed an order dated 1.10.2012
disposing of the petition with a direction to the respondents to examine and
consider the claim of the persons like petitioners therein in the light of the
decision rendered in the case of Teju Lal Yadav (supra).
In view of the aforesaid factual position, the instant writ petition can also
be disposed of in the same terms as passed in WP No.16047/2012 and Teju Lal
Yadav's case (supra). As a result, the impugned order is quashed. Let the
needful be done by the competent authority/respondents department within a
period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Accordingly, petition stands disposed of.
RAJ MOHAN SINGH)
JUDGE
Ansari
