The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Bhai Ram More
2023 Latest Caselaw 1879 MP

                                                                    1
                                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                      AT JABALPUR
                                                               BEFORE
                                                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH,
                                                            CHIEF JUSTICE
                                                                  &
                                                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
                                                       ON THE 2 nd OF FEBRUARY, 2023
                                                         WRIT APPEAL No. 61 of 2020

                                     BETWEEN:-
                                     1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                                           PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SCHOOL EDUCATION
                                           DEPARTMENT,    MANTRALAYA,    VALLABH
                                           BHAWAN, BHOPAL (M.P.)

                                     2.    UNDER SECRETARY, SCHOOL             EDUCATION
                                           D E P A R T M E N T , MANTRALAYA,     VALLABH
                                           BHAWAN, BHOPAL (M.P.)

                                     3.    THE COMMISSIONER, PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
                                           DISTRICT BHOPAL (M.P.)

                                     4.    DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER,         KHANDWA,
                                           DISTRICT KHANDWA (M.P.)

                                     5.    BLOCK EDUCATION      OFFICER,       KHANDWA,
                                           DISTRICT KHANDWA (M.P.)

                                     6.    DISTRICT    PENSION     OFFICER, KHANDWA
                                           DISTRICT KHANDWA (M.P.)

                                                                                           .....APPELLANTS
                                     (BY SHRI B.D. SINGH - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                     AND
                                     1.    BHAI RAM MORE, S/O SABALJI MORE, AGED
                                           ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCCUPATION: PEON RETIRED,
                                           GOVERNMENT HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
Signature Not Verified
                                           TEHSIL PANDHANA, DISTRICT KHANDWA (M.P.)
  SAN




Digitally signed by REENA HIMANSHU
                                     2.    NANYA MORE S/O GUKUL MORE              (DEAD)
SHARMA
Date: 2023.02.04 15:04:33 IST              THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE:
                                                                  2
                                     2(a). SMT. RAMKUNWAR MORE, W/O LATE SHRI
                                           NANYA MORE, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O
                                           WARD NO.4, H.No.34, PANDHANA, DISTRICT
                                           KHANDWA (M.P.)

                                                                                                     .....RESPONDENTS
                                     (BY SHRI ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1
                                     AND 2)

                                           This appeal coming on for admission this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice
                                     Ravi Malimath, Chief Justice passed the following:
                                                                           ORDER

Aggrieved by the order dated 10.09.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.20002 of 2018 in directing the respondents/State to consider the case of the petitioners, the State is in appeal.

The plea of the appellants/State is that a direction has been issued to grant regular pay-scale to the petitioners therein. The same is erroneous.

However, on hearing learned counsels, we do not find any reason to accept the contention of the appellants. The learned Single Judge has only stated that the respondents are directed to consider the case in the light of the judgment referred to therein. It is further held that in case the petitioners are found eligible, then the same benefit may be extended to them within a period of 3 months thereof. Therefore, the order is not a direction for compliance. It is an order directing the respondents to consider the case. Even the submission of learned Government Advocate that a suitable action will be taken, has also been noted in the order. Therefore, the appellants are always entitled to consider the case. We do not find that there is any direction to the respondents to act in a particular manner or not. Hence, we find that there is no legal injury

Signature Not Verified caused to the appellants.

SAN

Digitally signed by REENA HIMANSHU Consequently, the writ appeal is dismissed.

SHARMA Date: 2023.02.04 15:04:33 IST

Pending interlocutory applications stand disposed off.

                                          (RAVI MALIMATH)       (VISHAL MISHRA)
                                            CHIEF JUSTICE            JUDGE
                                     rv




Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by REENA HIMANSHU
SHARMA
Date: 2023.02.04 15:04:33 IST