Madhya Pradesh High Court

Prem Singh Parmar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 May, 2024

Author: Vivek Agarwal

Bench: Vivek Agarwal

                                                               1
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT JABALPUR
                                                        WP No. 12440 of 2021
                                (PREM SINGH PARMAR AND OTHERS Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

                           Dated : 09-05-2024
                                 Shri D.K. Dixit - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Brijesh Kumar Choubey

                           - Advocate for the petitioners.
                                 Shri Suyash Thakur - Government Advocate for the respondents/State.

Let affidavit of respondent No.2 be filed in view of the return filed by the State duly supported with an affidavit of one Shri Lokesh Marko, Dy. S.P.

(Rail) District Jabalpur, wherein, in para-9 it is mentioned that though the Police Department had made recommendation for grant of higher pay scale for employees like petitioner but the Finance Department in his wisdom has not found it appropriate to grant such benefit to the Ministerial employees.

The whole controversy is that petitioners are working as ASI (M) i.e. Ministerial and they are claiming same pay-scale as is admissible to the persons working on equivalent post in the regular force. Petitioner's counsel has drawn attention of this Court towards Annexure P-3 to submit that Inspector (M) is being paid the pay-scale as is applicable to Inspectors working in District Police

Force, but for the Sub-Inspectors, same is not made applicable causing discrimination within a class.

Though Shri Suyash Thakur, learned Government Advocate places reliance on the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench dt. 22.04.2024 in W.P. No. 14706 of 2021 (Mahendra Datt Awasthi & Ors. Vs. State of M.P. & Ors.) , but Shri Dixit, learned Sr. Advocate for the petitioner submits that the judgment in that case is distinguishable on its own facts.

However, that being a subject matter of adjudication, it appears that

Finance Department is though a party, has not been consulted before filing the reply and Principal Secretary, Finance is the best person to clarify that why such anomaly exists in the pay-scale of Sub-Inspector (M) and Sub-Inspector, Regular Police Force.

Let the affidavit be filed within 03 weeks.

List after summer vacation.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE