Ratiram Jatav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 2254 MP

                               1

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                  AT GWALIOR
                           BEFORE
     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
                ON THE 8th OF FEBRUARY, 2023

               WRIT PETITION No.1335 of 2023

     BETWEEN:-

     1.   RATIRAM JATAV S/O LATE SHRI
     LAKHAPAT JATAV, AGED ABOUT 61
     YEARS,    OCCUPATION:   ASSISTANT
     TEACHER AT GOVERNMENT PRIMARY
     SHCOOL MIRAN KI GADI AMBHAH
     DISTRICT   MORENA RESIDENT     OF
     PORSA, DISTRICT MORENA (MADHYA
     PRADESH)

     2.   SOVRAN PRASHAD SHARMA S/O
     LATE SHRI RAMGOPAL SHARMA, AGED
     ABOUT   63    YEARS, OCCUPATION:
     RETIRED ON THE POST ASSISTANT
     TEACHER    (GOVERNMENT PRIMARY
     SCHOOL DURGADAS KI GADI AMBHAH)
     RESIDENT OF WARD NO.8 GANDHI
     NAGAR PORSA DISTRICT MORENA M.P.
     (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                 ........PETITIONER

     (BY SHRI AJIT SINGH BHADORIYA - ADVOCATE)

     AND

1.   STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
     PRINCIPAL   SECRETARY,   SCHOOL
     EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, VALLABH
     BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.   THE DISTRICT EDUCATION, MORENA
     DISTRICT MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)

3.   THE JOINT DIRECTOR TREASURY, AUDIT
     AND PENSION MOTI MAHAL GWALIOR
                                            2

        (MADHYA PRADESH)

   4.   THE DISTRICT PENSION OFFICER,
        DISTRICT MORENA (MADHYA PRADESH)



                                                              ........RESPONDENTS

        (SHRI NEELESH TOMAR- GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR STATE)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        This petition coming on for hearing this day, the Court passed the
following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      ORDER

The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioners against the deprivation of the petitioners from the benefit of pay fixation, increments and other consequential benefits from the date of their initial appointment.

It is submitted by counsel for the petitioners that the matter of the petitioners is squarely covered and is identical to the case of Madhukant Yadav and 56 others Vs. State of M.P. and Others, in O.A.NO. 2745/1989 decided on 24.08.1982 and Jagdish Kumar Kushwah and Others Vs. State of M.P. & Others in W.P. NO. 548/2011(S)] decided on 31.01.2011. Earlier also, similar petition was preferred by the petitioners which was numbered as 7827 of 2014 and the same was decided on 12.02.2015 whereby the respondents were directed to consider the representation filed by the petitioners in the light of judgment dated 07.05.2008 passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Asha Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Others[Civil Appeal No. 3408 of 2008 (arising out of SLP(C) No.18881 of 2006)] and it was directed that the said representation would be decided within a period of three months from

the date of receipt of certified copy of the order but since the same was not decided, after lapse of more than seven years, a contempt petition was preferred by the present petitioners which was dismissed on the ground of limitation. However, liberty was granted to file fresh writ petition for the same cause of action. Accordingly, the present petition has been filed. Since this fact is not disputed that the matter could be decided in the light of judgment passed in case of Asha Saxena (supra), the petitioners are once again directed to make fresh representation with full particulars and details to the concerned authorities within a period of two weeks from today and in turn, the concerned authorities are directed to decide the same within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation along with certified copy of this order, keeping in view the delay which has been caused in approaching this Court by way of fresh petition in case if any monetary benefits accrues. The outcome of the representation shall be communicated to the petitioners soon after it is decided.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

With the aforesaid direction, the present petition is disposed off. E-copy/Certified copy as per rules/directions.

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE pwn PAWAN KUMAR 2023.02.08 19:29:46 +05'30'