Smt. Lalita Gosar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 14882 MP

                                 - : 1 :-
                                                        W.P. No.22642/2023


        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                      AT INDORE
                       BEFORE
            HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA

                 ON THE 11th OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

                 WRIT PETITION No. 22642 of 2023

BETWEEN:-
SMT. LALITA GOSAR W/O ISHWAR LAL GOSAR, AGED ABOUT 47
YEARS, OCCUPATION: ARDHA KUSHAL KARIGAR T.C.P. RAOTI
DISTT. RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                      .....PETITIONER
(SHRI SUBHASH         UPADHYAY,     LEARNED       COUNSEL   FOR     THE
PETITIONER.)

AND
   THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ADIM
1. JATI EVAM ANUSUCHIT JATI VIKAS VIBHAG VALLABH BHAWAN
   BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
   COMMISSIONER ADIWASI VIKAS SATPURA BHAWAN, BHOPAL
2.
   (MADHYA PRADESH)
   ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ADIVASI VIKAS
3.
   RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)
   DIVISIONAL DY COMMISSIONER ADIWASI EVAM ANUSUCHIT
4.
   JATI VIKAS UJJAIN DIVISION (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                    .....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI SHANTNU CHOURASIA, LEARNED PANEL LAWYER FOR THE
RESPONDENTS/STATE.)


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

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking regular pay- scale after completion of three years' service.

- : 2 :-

W.P. No.22642/2023

2. According to the petitioner, similar controversy has been put to rest by this Court in W.P. No.1297/2014 vide order dated 16.6.2014. According to the petitioner, vide order dated 4.9.2014 the petitioners in the aforesaid writ petition have been granted the said benefit and the petitioner being similarly placed employee is also entitled for the same benefit and she has submitted her representation vide Annexure P/6 to respondent No.3 but the same has not been considered so far.

3. Learned Panel Advocate appearing for the respondents/State on advance copy submits that at this stage, the petition may be disposed of directing the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in the light of judgment passed by this Court in W.P. No.1297/2014.

4. The submission made by learned Panel Advocate appears to be reasonable. Let the authorities apply their mind in this matter and take a decision preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

With the aforesaid, this petition stands disposed of.

( VIVEK RUSIA ) JUDGE Alok/-

Digitally signed by ALOK GARGAV Date: 2023.09.12 10:25:44 +05'30'