A.K. Agarwal vs The State Of M.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 16666 MP

                                                              1
                            IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT JABALPUR
                                                        BEFORE
                                             HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
                                               ON THE 9 th OF OCTOBER, 2023
                                              WRIT PETITION No. 16287 of 2003

                           BETWEEN:-
                           ANIL KUMAR AGRAWAL S/O LATE RD AGRAWAL R/O
                           C/O AK ENTERPRIZES SHASTRI CHOWK, SATNA
                           (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                           .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI UTTAM MAHESHWARI-ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1. GOVT OF MP, SEPARATE INCOME DEPARTMENT
                           VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL.
                           2. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX, MP INDORE.
                           3. DIVISIONAL DY. COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL
                           TAX SUB REGIONAL OFFICE JABALPUR.
                           4. DIVISIONAL DY. COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL
                           TAX, SUB REGITIONAL OFFICE, CHAMBER OF
                           COMMERCE BUILDING CIRCUIT HOUSE, SATNAM.P

                                                                                         .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI MANU V. JOHN-PANEL LAYWER)

                                 Th is petition coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the

                           following:
                                                               ORDER

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, finally heard.

2. The singular prayer of the petitioner is to grant annual increment. The petitioner was appointed on compassionate basis by order dated 29.6.1987 (Annexure A-4).

3. The singular reason assigned in the reply for not granting him annual increment is that as per the Government circular dated 28.6.1994, the petitioner Signature Not Verified Signed by: MANZOOR AHMED Signing time: 10/10/2023 10:26:54 AM

was required to pass Hindi Typing Test. The singular reason was criticized by contending that the petitioner was appointed in the year 1987 and neither in the appointment order nor as per the provisions applicable at that point of time petitioner was required to pass the Hindi Typing Test. The Full Bench in the case of Manoj Kumar Purohit and others Vs. State of MP and others, reported in 2016(1) MPLJ 449 has made it clear that the petitioner is entitled for increment.

4. The prayer is opposed by the learned counsel for the State on the basis of reply.

5. As noticed, the stand of the department is that pursuant to the circular

dated 28.6.1994, the petitioner was required to pass Hindi Typing Test.

6. The Full Bench in the case of Manoj Kumar Purohit (supra) framed various questions for its determination. Question (d) reads as under:-

"(d) when the appointment is made under the Policy of Compassionate Appointment or Regularization specifying passing of Hindi Typing Test as essential and also the letter of appointment provides for that condition for entitlement of increment."

The answer to this question reads thus:-

"Whereunder the policy as well as letter of appointment provide for passing of Hindi Typing Test, in such a case the employee would be entitled to increment only after passing Hindi Typing Test."

7. A plain reading of the relevant portion of judgment of the Full Bench Signature Not Verified Signed by: MANZOOR AHMED Signing time: 10/10/2023 10:26:54 AM

makes it clear that curtains on the issue are finally drawn by holding that if in the relevant policy or in the appointment order there exists a provision for passing Hindi Typing Test, the employee would be entitled to increment only after satisfying the said condition of passing Hindi Typing Test. However, in the instant case, as projected, at the time of appointment of petitioner in the year 1987, there was neither any condition in the appointment order nor there existed any such circular or provision, which makes it obligatory for the petitioner to pass Hindi Typing Test for securing increment. Thus, case of the petitioner is covered by Manoj Kumar Purohit (supra) and the action of the respondents in depriving him from increment on the basis of a subsequent circular dated 28.6.1994 cannot be approved.

8. Resultantly, the respondents are directed to release the increments and other consequential benefits from due date. This order shall be complied with within 60 days from the date of production of copy of the order.

9. Petition is allowed.

(SUJOY PAUL) JUDGE Ansari

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MANZOOR AHMED Signing time: 10/10/2023 10:26:54 AM