Kishori Lal Charmkar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 2783 MP

                                                            1
                           IN    THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                     BEFORE
                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                             ON THE 15 th OF FEBRUARY, 2023
                                             WRIT PETITION No. 3412 of 2023

                          BETWEEN:-
                          KISHORI LAL CHARMKAR S/O MUKUNDILAL, AGED
                          ABOUT 67 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED HEAD
                          MASTER VILLAGE UCHEHARA WARD NO. 1 POST
                          UCHEHARA DISTRICT SATNA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....PETITIONER
                          (BY SHRI VIDYA PRASAD - ADVOCATE)

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

                          2.    THE  COMMISSIONER PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
                                GOUTAM NAGAR BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          3.    THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER SATNA
                                DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          4.    THE DISTRICT PENSION OFFICER                SATNA
                                DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          5.    SANKUL        PRACHARYA GOVT.   HIGHER
                                SECONDARY    SCHOOL    ECHAUL UCHEHARA
                                DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI MANAS MANI VERMA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                                This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                          following:
                                                             ORDER

The present petition has been preferred under Article 226 of Constitution Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAIBHAV YEOLEKAR Signing time: 2/17/2023 11:12:28 AM

of India seeking following relief :-

( i ) "Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents-authorities to consider and decide the representation dated 17/10/2018 made by the petitioner contained in Annexure P/4 by a speaking and reasoned order within a time bound frame in light of the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court as well as this Hon'ble Court contained in Annexures P/2 & P/3 in the interest of justice.

(ii) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also kindly be passed, in the interest of justice."

It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner superannuated on 30.06.2017. He is seeking increment which comes into force on 1st of July of any year. Therefore, he be given the benefit of increment to be payable on 1st of July.

Learned Government Advocate informs this Court that the matter is pending before Full Bench of this Court by way of W.P. No.4118/2020. Learned Government Advocate refers pendency of SLP (SLP (C) No.8219/2020).

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/authorities that if the issue pending before Full Bench and Supreme Court has been decided in favour of the petitioner and if petitioner is found entitled to get the benefit of increment payable on 1st of July of any year immediate or subsequent to retirement of petitioner on 30th June of that year then benefit of one annual increment be added w.e.f. 01.07.2016 upto 30.6.2017 to the petitioner. Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAIBHAV YEOLEKAR Signing time: 2/17/2023 11:12:28 AM

Needless to say that said benefit be extended to him if the petitioner informs the concerned authorities about the said order.

It is made clear that case of the petitioner may be considered then and there only, so that petitioner may not have to approach this Court again for the same relief. It is further clarified that if petitioner is found not entitled for the said benefit, then his case shall be rejected accordingly.

In above terms, the petition stands disposed of.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE vy

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAIBHAV YEOLEKAR Signing time: 2/17/2023 11:12:28 AM