Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Nitibala Pungal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 31 January, 2025
Author: Anil Verma
Bench: Anil Verma
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:2118
1 WP-3560-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
ON THE 31st OF JANUARY, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 3560 of 2025
SMT. NITIBALA PUNGAL AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Arun Katare - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri B.M.Patel - Government Advocate for the respondents/State.
ORDER
With the consent of both the parties, matter is heard finally.
2. Petitioners have preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:
(i) That, the present petition filed by the petitioner may kindly be
allowed;
(ii) That, the respondents be directed to correct the date of initial
appointment of petitioners and they be directed to replace the date
of each petitioner presently mentioned on the portal namely
IFMIS, by replacing it from date of initial appointment as Shiksha
Karmi/Samvida Shala Shikshak to that extent the date of initial
appointment be directed to be corrected with a further direction to
the respondents to count the aforesaid services rendered by the
petitioners from the date of their initial appointment as Shiksha
Karmi/Samvida Shala Shikshak, for all :purposes including
gratuity etc.
(iii) |That, any other just, suitable and proper relief, which this
Hon'ble Court deems fit, may also kindly be granted to the
petitioner. Costs be also awarded in favour of the petitioner.
3. Brief facts of the case are that petitioners are working as Teacher in
different Government Educational Institutions at Guna. They were initially
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:2118
2 WP-3560-2025
appointed as Shiksha Karmi under the Recruitment Rules framed by the
School Education Department namely M.P. Shiksha Karmi Recruitment
Rules, 1997 and they were three categories of Shiksha Karmi i.e. Shiksha
Karmi Verg-I, Shiksha Karmi Verg-II and Shiksha Karmi Verg-III.
Thereafter, the State Government formulated rules namely M.P. Contract
Teachers Rules, 2001. Under the aforesaid Rules, in place of Shiksha
Karmis, Samvida Teacher Grade-I, Samvida Teacher Grade-II and Samvida
Teacher Grade-III were appointed and some of the petitioners belong to this
category. In the year 2008, the State Government introduced Adhyapak
Cadre, wherein a provision has been made with respect to absorption of
Shiksha Karmi appointed under the Rules of 1997 and those who were
appointed in 2001 as contract teacher under the Rules of 2001 or amended
Contract Rules of 2005. Accordingly, services of all the petitioners have
been absorbed as Adhyapak under different heads. Thereafter, the State
Government again in 2018 formulated Shikshak Samverg Rules and
according to the Rules, petitioners have been absorbed under Shikshak Cadre
but on the education portal, the appointment of petitioner No.1 is shown as
1.4.2007, the appointment of petitioner No.2 is shown as 18.10.2004, the
appointment of petitioner No.3 is shown as 18.1.2010 and the appointment of
petitioner No.4 is shown as 29.8.2011, although they have granted
Kramonnati on the basis of their initial appointment. Petitioners have
preferred representation for correction of the dates on the aforesaid portal but
the same was not considered. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioners have
preferred this writ petition.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:2118
3 WP-3560-2025
4. A limited prayer has been made by the learned counsel for the
petitioners that Division Bench of this Court in the case of Nagar Palika
Parishad through its Chief Municipal Officer Shri Sudhir Kumar vs. Kundan
Sankhala and others (W.A.No.2358/2024) order dated 22.10.2024 has
decided the same issue and it has been held that virtually all teachers have
become State Government employees and their services are liable to be
counted from the date of their initial appointment. If the respondent
authorities are directed to decide the pending representation of the petitioners
in the light of the judgment passed in the case of Nagar Palika Parishad
(supra) within a time bound period, then their grievance would be redressed.
5. Per contra, learned Government Advocate has opposed the prayer
and prayed for its rejection.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this petition is
disposed of directing the petitioners to file a detailed fresh representation
along with certified copy of this order within a period of 15 days from today
before respondents No.1 to 4, who in turn are directed to dwell upon the
same and pass a self-contained speaking order in the light of order passed in
the case of Nagar Palika Parishad through its Chief Municipal Officer Shri
Sudhir Kumar vs. Kundan Sankhala and others (W.A.No.2358/2024) order
dated 22.10.2024, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of
certified copy of this order and communicate the outcome to the petitioners.
If the respondents considered that the case of the petitioners has been found
similar with the order passed by the Division Bench in the case of Nagar
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:2118
4 WP-3560-2025
Palika Parishad (supra), then the petitioners date of appointment shall be
corrected on the IFMIS portal, in accordance with law.
7. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of.
8. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the
merits of the case.
9. No order as to cost.
(ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE
(alok)
