Smt. Kiran Upadhyay vs Madhya Pradesh State Beej Avm Firm Vikas ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 21285 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Smt. Kiran Upadhyay vs Madhya Pradesh State Beej Avm Firm Vikas ... on 6 August, 2024

Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla

Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla

                                                             1                              WP-5608-2023
                            IN        THE   HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT INDORE
                                                       BEFORE
                                      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
                                                 ON THE 6 th OF AUGUST, 2024
                                               WRIT PETITION No. 5608 of 2023
                                         SMT. KIRAN UPADHYAY
                                                 Versus
                             MADHYA PRADESH STATE BEEJ AVM FIRM VIKAS NIGAM
                                      DWARA PRABANDH SANCHALAK
                         Appearance:
                                 Shri Anand Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner.
                                 Shri Ravindra Prakash Joshi, learned counsel for the respondent.

                                                              ORDER

With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.

2. The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 20.02.2023 by which the case of the petitioner for veniyamitikaran has been rejected and the petitioner has been superannuated on the completion of the age of 60 years by order dated 31.03.2022.

3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order impugned is contrary to the directions passed by this Court in W.P. No.26057/2021 (Annexure P/3). The petitioner earlier filed a writ petition claiming the relief of veniyamitikaran and backwages, seniority etc. It was stated that he was working as a Peon on daily wages since 1994 and his services were terminated on 06.07.2000. He filed a case before the Labour Court and by order dated 25.01.2011, the Labour Court directed the reinstatement of the

2 WP-5608-2023

petitioner with 50% backwages. The said order was modified by order dated 05.05.2011 and reinstatement of workmen without backwages. This Court dispose off the said petition with the following directions:-

"Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present Writ Petition is disposed of and the Managing Director, Madhya Pradesh State Seed and Farm Development Corporation, Bhopal (respondent No.2) and Regional Manager, Madhya Pradesh State Seed and Farm Development Corporation, Indore (respondent No.3) are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for viniyamitikaran in the light of the Policy framed by the State Government. The aforesaid exercise be concluded within 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It is needless to mention that the respondents shall treat the petitioner as Daily Wager appointed in the year 1994 and the break in service which was on account of his /her termination which has been set aside by the Labour Court, will be treated as period spent on duty while considering benefit of viniyamitikaran to the petitioner. The benefits, if any, accruing to the petitioner shall also be extended to him within a period of further 2 months."

4. Counsel for the respondent supports the impugned order.

5. After considering the para-7 of the judgment passed in the previous petition and the impugned order, this Court finds that the respondent has not passed the impugned order as per the directions of this Court. As per the directions of this Court, the petitioner has to be treated on daily wages since 1994 and break in service which was on account of his termination which was set aside by the Labour Court, the said period was directed to be treated on duty without considering the benefit of veniyamitikaran.

6. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned order dated 20.02.2023 (Annexure P/1) is quashed. The Managing Director of the Corporation is directed to pass fresh order strictly as per the directions passed by this Court

3 WP-5608-2023 in para-7 of previous petition within a period of one month from the date of filing of copy of the order passed today.

7. The petition is allowed and disposed off.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE

soumya