Madhya Pradesh High Court

M. P. Road Transport Corporation vs Shridev Sharma on 24 January, 2025

Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla

Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla

1 WA-2953-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH
ON THE 24th OF JANUARY, 2025
WRIT APPEAL No. 723 of 2024
MP ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
O.P. JAIN AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for petitioner.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.
WITH
WRIT APPEAL No. 1024 of 2023
MP ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
SHANTILAL PANCHAL AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda

- Advocate for petitioner.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 1025 of 2023
MP ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
BADRILAL GUPTA AND OTHERS

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 25-01-2025
15:12:19
2 WA-2953-2024
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 1026 of 2023
MP ROAD TRASPORT CORPORATION
Versus
RAVIKANT KALE AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 1027 of 2023
MP ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
RAMSWAROOP SHARMA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 1028 of 2023
MP ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
ASHWANI KUMAR SHARMA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 25-01-2025
15:12:19
3 WA-2953-2024
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 1029 of 2023
MP ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
MANSARAM PATIDAR AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 1030 of 2023
MP ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
MOHD. SALIM AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 1031 of 2023
MP ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
DAYANAND MISHRA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.

Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 25-01-2025
15:12:19
4 WA-2953-2024
WRIT APPEAL No. 1032 of 2023
MP ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
BANSHILAL SHARMA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 2773 of 2024
MP ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
SMT. LATA DAREKAR AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 2952 of 2024
MP ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
S.N. BHAWSAR AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 2953 of 2024
M. P. ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 25-01-2025
15:12:19
5 WA-2953-2024
SHRIDEV SHARMA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 2954 of 2024
M. P. ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
OM PRAKASH SHARMA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 2964 of 2024
MP ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
SHAKIR ALI AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 2965 of 2024
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Versus
MUBARIK HUSAIN AND OTHERS
Appearance:

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 25-01-2025
15:12:19
6 WA-2953-2024
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 2981 of 2024
MP ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
L.S. CHOUHAN AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 2982 of 2024
MP ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
SMT. VAKILA BANO AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 2987 of 2024
M.P. ROAD. TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
RAMESH CHANDRA JAIN AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 25-01-2025
15:12:19
7 WA-2953-2024
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 2988 of 2024
MP ROAD TRAPSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
MAHESH KUMAR ANIYA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

WRIT APPEAL No. 2990 of 2024
MP ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Versus
MAHESH GAUD AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Girish Patwardhan - Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Mukul Bhutda
- Advocate for appellant.
Shri C.M.Nair - Advocate for respondents/writ petitioners.

ORDER

Per: Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla

The instant appeals have been filed under Section 2(1) of Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya Khandpeeth Ko Appeal, Adhiniyam, 2005 being aggrieved by the order dated 27.3.2023 against common order passed by Single Judge in batch of writ petitions whereby the writ petitions have been allowed and the respondents have been directed to be given the arrears of gratuity, ex-gratia, leave encashment with 6% interest from the date of

8 WA-2953-2024 payment of dearness allowance till the date of actual payment. The appellants have further challenged the order passed by the Single Judge in Review Petition against the said order which was registered as RP No.944/2023 whereby the Review Petition has also been dismissed. Regard being had to the similitude of the facts, all the appeals are being disposed off by the common order.

2. The respondents are employees of the then Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation. They opted for Voluntary Retirement Scheme as per the memorandum of settlement. According to them, in terms of the aforesaid settlement, the benefit of dearness allowance was not given after pay fixation under 4th pay commission which resulted into payment of less amount of gratuity, ex-gratia and leave encashment. The similarly placed employees raised industrial disputes before the Labour Court, Ujjain which came to be allowed vide award dated 01.04.2013 in case no.72/08 ID Reference. The MPSRTC filed various writ petitions before this Court in W.P.No.8822/2013(S) and others. Vide order dated 09.03.2017 all the writ petitions were dismissed with a direction to the Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation that the employees shall be entitled for similar benefits which have been extended to the identically placed persons by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.321/2013.

3. The respondents submits that after the aforesaid order, the benefit of dearness allowance has been granted to them but the consequential benefits like gratuity, ex-gratia and leave encashment have not been granted. According to the respondents, after grant of dearness allowance to

9 WA-2953-2024 them it will increase the amount of gratuity, ex-gratia and leave encashment payable to them, but the said difference has not been granted to them till date.

4. The Association of the workmen employees raised a dispute and a reference was made whether the workmen have been paid the dues while granting voluntary retirement and in case, workmen have not been paid, the emoluments to what reliefs they are entitled ?.

5. The Labour Court has passed the award that workmen are entitled for pay scale on the basis of recommendation of 5th Pay Commission has held the workmen are entitled for higher amount as per the impugned award. The appellants challenged the said award in WP No.8822/2013(s). The said petition was disposed off in the light of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Ramesh Chandra Sankla Vs. Vikram Cement (2008) 14 SCC 58 and also the order passed by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.321/2013 holding that in the light of the judgment delivered by the Apex Court, the Corporation does not have any choice except to grant of dearness relief which was applicable at the time of VRS to the employees by the Corporation at par with the employees of the State Government (Scale of 4th Pay Commission) as the same has not been done. It was further directed that the respondents shall calculate the VRS amount by taking into account the pay scale of old 4th Central Pay Commission dearness allowance which was given to the employees of the State government at the time VRS was granted to the employees by the Corporation. The said order was challenged before the Apex Court in SLP(C) No.32869/2017 and the said SLP was

10 WA-2953-2024 disposed off directing State government and Madhya Pradesh Road Transport Corporation (appellant) to take a considered decision whether it would extend the benefit of 5th Pay Commission, as prayed in the present petition, unfettered by the order of the High Court.

6. After notice, the respondents have filed reply denying the aforesaid relief only on the ground that the petitioners were not party to W.P.No.8822/2019(S) and Civil Appeal No.321/2013. Absolutely obnoxious reply has been filed by the respondents. The Hon'ble Apex Court while passing the order in Civil Appeal No.321/2013 (M.D., M.P. Road Transport Corporation and Anr. Vs. Prantiya Rajya Parivahan Karamchari Sangh and Ors.) and this Court in W.P.No.8822/2013(S) had clearly held that all the employees of Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation who took Voluntary Retirement under the Scheme/Settlement are entitled for the dearness allowance and other consequential benefits. Once the dearness allowance has been granted then the difference of amount of gratuity, ex- gratia and leave encashment are also to be extended to the petitioners. It makes no difference if they were party in the earlier litigation or not.

7. Counsel for appellant vehemently argued that the case of the petitioners was not identical to the case of employees in WP No.8822/2013(s). In the said case the employees have first approached the Labour Court and after reference the award was passed. In the present case, the employees have directly approached the High Court and the learned Single Judge has not considered the aforesaid objection of the appellants. It is further submitted that in Writ Appeal No.2773/2024 the payment was made

11 WA-2953-2024 to the employees under threat of contempt as a contempt was filed and notice was issued. He argued that if the payment is made to an employee under threat of contempt, the same would not operate as Estoppel.

8. We have heard the learned counsel for parties.

9. We do not find any merit in the appeal. Counsel for respondents could not dispute the fact that the dearness allowance has been granted to all the employees which was applicable at the time of VRS of the employees of the Corporation. The learned Single Judge has considered the judgment passed by the Apex Court in an appeal filed by the appellant in a case of the Association. i.e. Civil Appeal No.321/2013 (M.D, M.P. Road Transport Corporation and another Vs. Prantiya Rajya Parivahan Karmachari Sangh and others. It is apposite to reproduce the relevant portion of said judgment as under:-

"The present appeal arises out of judgment and order dated 1st July, 2011 passed by the High Court of Judicature of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Indore. The High Court in paragraph 8, after taking into consideration the settlement dated 3rd February, 1988 arrived at between the Managing Director, M.P.State Road Transport Corporation and the M.P.Transport Workers Federation, has held that all the employees of the Corporation are entitled to the same rate of dearness allowance as is being payable to the employees of the M.P. State Government prior to the Fifth Central Pay Commission's report having been accepted by the State Government for its employees but this report has not been implemented so far as the employees of the State Road Transport Corporation is concerned.

12 WA-2953-2024 We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

We do not find any good ground to interfere with the impugned judgment for the simple reason that in terms of the agreement it was agreed between the M.P. State Road Transport Corporation, the appellant No.1 herein and the Prantiya Rajya Parivahan Karmachari Sangh-respondent No.1 that the same amount of dearness allowance which is payable to the State Government employees would be payable to the employees of the M.P.State Road Transport Corporation. It is not in dispute that even those employees of the State Government who have not opted for the revised pay scale recommended by the Fifth Central Pay Commission, are being paid the old pay scale but the amount of dearness allowance is higher than what is being paid to the employees who have opted for the pay scale given by the Fifth Central Pay Commission. As the employees of the M.P.State Road Corporation having not been given the benefit of the revised pay scale recommended by the Fifth Central Pay Commission, they are being paid the old Fourth Central Pay Commission pay scale, however they are entitled for the dearness allowance which is payable to the employees of the State Government who are getting the old pay scales.

It is pertinent to mention here that the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has clarified regarding the payment of the increased dearness allowance to the employees who have opted for Voluntary Retirement Scheme during their service period before having retired voluntarily. Payment of arrears of dearness allowance be made to the existing employees as well as

13 WA-2953-2024 those who have retired voluntarily, till the time they were in service, by making an advertisement in the newspaper inviting applications from the employees and the employees who have already retired voluntarily. Appellant No.1 shall get the details from the employees and shall verify from the records and make necessary payments within two months.