Sumeri Lal Tekam vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 13996 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Sumeri Lal Tekam vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 13 May, 2024

Author: Vivek Agarwal

Bench: Vivek Agarwal

                                                           1
                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                            AT JABALPUR
                                                     BEFORE
                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                                 ON THE 13 th OF MAY, 2024
                                             WRIT PETITION No. 11584 of 2024

                           BETWEEN:-
                           SUMERI LAL TEKAM S/O SHRI BAISAKHU SINGH
                           TEKAM, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                           ASSISTANT TEACHER GOVT. PRIMARY SCHOOL
                           JALDHRA, BLOCK NIWAS, DISTRICT MANDLA
                           (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI SUBHAS CHANDRA PATEL - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH ITS
                                 SECRETARY TRIBAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT
                                 VALLABH    BHAWAN,    BHOPAL   (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           2.    THE   SECRETARY THE STATE OF MADHYA
                                 PRADESH VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           3.    THE     ASSISTANT   COMMISSIONER TRIBAL
                                 AFFAIRS     DEPARTMENT MANDLA (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           4.    DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER THE STATE OF
                                 MADHYA      PRADESH MANDLA    (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           5.    BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER THE STATE OF
                                 MADHYA PRADESH N IWAS MANDLA (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                                                                                   .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI ANKIT AGRAWAL - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

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

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PUSHPENDRA
PATEL
Signing time: 13-05-2024
19:35:00
                                                                2
                           following:
                                                                ORDER

The petitioner is seeking regularization of the pay-scale from the date of his initial appointment along with all the benefits accruing therefrom. He has based his case to be dealt on parity to dictum laid down by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 930/2008 (State of M.P.and others Vs. Pankaj Saxena)

decided on 19th February, 2015.

Under the circumstances, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to move a fresh representation before the authority concerned inter-alia praying that he be granted the similar relief as has been granted to the appellants in Civil Appeal No.930/2008. If such a representation is moved by

the petitioner before the authority concerned, it is requested to decide the said representation in light of the decision rendered by the Apex Court in the aforesaid Appeal and if the case of the petitioner is covered by the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court, then similar relief be also extended to the petitioner herein.

Let this exercise be done within a period of 8 weeks from the date of filing of such a representation by the petitioner, by a reasoned order and shall communicate the outcome of its decision to the petitioner.

I t is made amply clear that this Court is not expressing any opinion regarding the merits of the case of the parties and the authority concerned is further requested to deal with the said representation of the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid, the petition is finally disposed of.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE pp