Anita Kamble vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 14869 MP

                                                             1
                           IN    THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                     BEFORE
                                          HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
                                            ON THE 11 th OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
                                              WRIT PETITION No. 2495 of 2022

                          BETWEEN:-
                          ANITA KAMBLE W/O LATE SHRIKANT KAMBLE, AGED
                          ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SUB INSPECTOR
                          OFFICE AT NEW POLICE CONTROL ROOM POLICE
                          STATION ARERA HILLS IN FRONT OF MINTO HALLS
                          CITY SURVEILLANCE SECOND FLOOR JAHANGIRABAD
                          BHOPAL DISTRICT BHOPAL M.P. R/O H-54-A/110 SOUTH
                          T. T. NAGAR MATA MANDIR BHOPAL DISTRICT
                          BHOPAL M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                           .....PETITIONER
                          (BY SHRI SHANKAR DAYAL MISHRA - ADVOCATE)

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

                          2.    DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE POLICE
                                HEAD QUARTER S DISTRICT BHOPAL (M.P)
                                (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          3.    DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
                                B H O P A L CITY RANGE BHOPAL (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI ANSHUMAN SWAMI - PANEL LAWYER)

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

With the consent, finally heard.

Signature Not Verified In this petition, the singular question is whether respondents were justified Signed by: PARITOSH KUMAR Signing time: 9/13/2023 10:54:34 AM

in notionally promoting the petitioner and depriving her from benefit of arrears of pay of the promotional post.

In nutshell, the relevant facts are that petitioner while working as Sub Inspector was subjected to a criminal case vide Crime No.1115/2014. Since, petitioner was facing criminal case vide Sessions Case No.40/2015, the petitioner was not promoted. The petitioner was acquitted by judgment dated 23.12.2016 (Annexure P/1). The petitioner by representation dated 06.02.2017 (Annexure P/2) informed the department about her acquittal and furnished the copy of the aforesaid judgment. After repeated representations, petitioner was promoted by order dated 25.01.2021 (Annexure P/5).

Partially criticising this order, Shri S.D. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although the petitioner was given ante dated promotion from the date her junior was promoted but said promotion was given on notional basis and she was erroneously deprived from arrears. After acquittal of the petitioner, the petitioner was entitled to get the arrears of salary of promotional post because she was all along willing to perform the duties of promotional post but she was deprived to do so for the reasons solely attributable to the department. Shri S.D. Mishra, learned counsel placed reliance on the judgment of this Court reported in State of M.P. and another vs. Shankar Lal Sahu and another 2001 (2) M.P.H.T. 19 (DB).

Shri Anshuman Swami, learned Panel Lawyer opposed the prayer and submits that when review DPC had taken place and petitioner was found to be suitable, she was given promotion. The petitioner cannot be granted arrears of pay of promotional post because she has not worked on the promotional post.

No other point is pressed by the parties.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: PARITOSH KUMAR Signing time: 9/13/2023 10:54:34 AM

Petitioner stood acquitted by the judgment dated 23.12.2016. The petitioner apprised the department about this judgment on 06.02.2017. The Department, thereafter, took few years to promote the petitioner by order dated 25.01.2021. It is clear like cloudless sky that by the representation dated 06.02.2017, the petitioner merely furnished the copy of judgment dated 23.12.2016 but did not make any prayer for either opening the sealed cover or holding a review DPC. First representation filed with writ petition by the petitioner is preferred on 09.01.2019 (Annexure P/3). Thus, from 09.01.2019 it can be said that the petitioner was willing to perform her duties of promotional post but was deprived to do so because of inaction of the respondents. This Court by following the judgment of Supreme Court in Union of India vs. K.V. Jankiraman, AIR 1991 SC 2010 in Shankar Lal Sahu (supra) opined that in such cases where employee is exonerated and shown his/her willingness to perform duties of promotional post but deprived to do so, employee is entitled to get the arrears of salary of promotional post. Principle of "No work - No pay" cannot be pressed into service. This principle is applicable in the instant case from 09.01.2019 when petitioner preferred representation (Annexure P/3) and shown her willingness to perform duties of promotional post. Thus, respondents shall grant her arrears of salary of promotional post from 09.01.2019 till the date of her actual assumption of duty on promotion. The

impugned order dated 25.01.2021 to the extent she was deprived from arrears of salary to the extent indicated above is set aside.

Petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.

(SUJOY PAUL) Signature Not Verified Signed by: PARITOSH KUMAR Signing time: 9/13/2023 10:54:34 AM

JUDGE PK

Signature Not Verified Signed by: PARITOSH KUMAR Signing time: 9/13/2023 10:54:34 AM