Smt. Manjula Sharma vs Education Department
2024 Latest Caselaw 4280 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Smt. Manjula Sharma vs Education Department on 13 February, 2024

Author: Pranay Verma

Bench: Pranay Verma

                                                                 1
                            IN    THE          HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT INDORE
                                                         BEFORE
                                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA
                                                 ON THE 13 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
                                                WRIT PETITION No. 19330 of 2020

                           BETWEEN:-
                           SMT. MANJULA SHARMA W/O LATE VIRENDRA
                           KUMAR     SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
                           OCCUPATION: NIL HOUSE NO. 208 WARD NO. 6 TEHSIL
                           PIPLODA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI SUBHASH UPADHYAY - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1.    EDUCATION DEPARTMENT THROUGH PRINCIPAL
                                 SECRETARY VALLABH    BHAWAN,  BHOPAL
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    DISTRICT   EDUCATIO                 OFFICER RATLAM
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           3.    DISTRICT   TREASURY                 OFFICER RATLAM
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           4.    DISTRICT PENSION OFFICER RATLAM (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                                                                                             .....RESPONDENTS
                           ( BY SHRI ANENDRA SINGH PARIHAR - ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE
                           GENERAL)

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

1. By this petition the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :-

"(a) That, the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents for payment of two advance increments after passing B.Ed. Examination at his

own expenses and refix the pay of the Petitioner with all consequential benefits and respondents to direct to calculate arrears within a stipulated period.

(b) That, the petition may be allowed with cost.

(c) That, any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deems fit may kindly be awarded in the interest of justice."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation to the respondents in respect of the reliefs as claimed for by her in this petition which may be directed to be considered in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in State of M.P. and Another V/s. Badrinarayan Acharya and Others AIR 1996 SC 2779.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that in case said representation is made by the petitioner then the same shall be decided in accordance with law.

4. Thus in view of the aforesaid, it is directed that in case the petitioner makes a representation along with all requisite documents including a copy of the judgment in the case of Badrinarayan Acharya (supra) before the respondents, then the competent authority i.e. respondent No.2 District Education Officer, District Ratlam shall decide the same in accordance with law by passing a reasoned and a speaking order within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the said representation. In case the case of the petitioner is found to be similar to the case of Badrinarayan Acharya (supra) then the benefits be extended to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of decision.

5. In case the case of the petitioner is not found to be so similar then reasons for the same may be given.

6. With the aforesaid, without expressing any opinion on merits,

petition stands disposed off.

(PRANAY VERMA) JUDGE ns