Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Rajkumari Thakur vs Forest Department on 6 March, 2025
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:5906
1 WP-4384-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
ON THE 6 th OF MARCH, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 4384 of 2019
SMT. RAJKUMARI THAKUR
Versus
FOREST DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Madhusudan Dwivedi - Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Mradula Sen - G.A for the respondent/State.
ORDER
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petition is squarely
covered by the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Smt. Usha
Jatthapi vs. Forest Department and Ors.(W.P No.6485/2019) decided on
6/11/2024.
02. Counsel for the State though opposes the prayer, however, could
not distinguish the case of the petitioner with the case of Usha Jatthapi.
03. Considering the same, the present petition is disposed off in the
light of the order passed in the case of Smt. Usha Jatthapi(supra).
04. Heard on IA No.9032/2024 which is an application for urgent
hearing of the petition.
05. Considering the nature of the petition and the fact that the
petitioner is a government servant, the petition is of year 2019 and the
pleadings are complete, IA is allowed. The matter is heard finally.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:5906
2 WP-4384-2019
06. In the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 10.08.2017 (Annexure
P/6) whereby the 2nd Higher Pay Scale granted to the petitioner has been
withdrawn/cancelled on the ground that the same was granted to him by
mistake. As a consequence, recovery order dated 18.01.2019 (Annexure
P/11) has been issued for recovery of excess amount of Rs.7,49,470/-.
07. The Petitioner was initially appointed on the Post of Lower
Division Clerk on compassionate ground due to death of her father in
harness vide order dated 12.06.1990 and thereafter she joined in the
Respondent/Department as per appointment order in the pay scale of Rs.950-
25-1000-30-1210-40-1530. Since then she had worked due diligently and
sincerely. Meanwhile, her pay was revised in the pay scale as per the
provisions contained in M.P. Pay Revision Rules, 1990 and thereafter again
her pay was revised as per the M.P. Revision of Pay Rules, 1998 as on
01.01.1996, as per which petitioner was granted pay scale of Rs.3500-5200/-.
Thereafter vide order dated 29/4/2010 the benefit of Time Scale Pay was
granted to the petitioner, after completion of 10 years of service w.e.f.
01.04.2006 as per the recommendation of the DPC, pursuant to the Circular
issued by the State Govt. on 24.01.2008, consequently the Pay Scale of
Rs.4000-100-6000/- had been extended to the petitioner. It is also pertinent
to mention here that the State Government has revised the Pay Scale as per
the provisions contained in M.P. Revision of Pay Rules, 2009 and
accordingly the pay of the petitioner was revised in the Pay Scale of
Rs.5200-20200+2400 grade pay w.e.f. 01.04.2006 by fixing her pay. Since
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:5906
3 WP-4384-2019
the petitioner had already completed 20 years of service on 02/07.2010,
therefore, as per the State Government's circular 24.01.2008, the petitioner
was again entitled for receiving the benefit of 2nd time pay scale after
completion of 20 years of service. Consequently, the benefit had been
extended to the petitioner vide order dated 15.12.2010 in the pay scale of
Rs.4500-125-7000 (revised pay scale of Rs.5200-20000 + 2800 grade pay)
as per the recommendation of the DPC held on 14&15 December 2010. All
of sudden the aforesaid orders have been cancelled/withdrawn vide order
dated 10.08.2017, after 7 years of extending the benefit of 2nd Time Pay
Scale, without even issuing any show cause notice, in most arbitrary manner,
by mentioning the fact that the petitioner is not an account trained employee
and fixed her salary in the pay scale of Rs.8700+2400 instead of grade pay
of Rs.8970 + 2800/-. Based upon the cancellation of 2nd Higher Pay scale
vide order dated 10.08.2017 and fixation of pay the Conservator of Forest,
Indore had passed an Order on 18/1/2019 whereby it was directed to recover
the excess amount which has been paid erroneously to the petitioner on
account of extending the 2nd time scale of pay vide order dated 15.12.2010
without issuing any show-cause notice or granting any opportunity of
hearing to the petitioner. As per the recovery order the amount of recovery
w.e.f. 01.04.2006 to September, 2018 has calculated in the tune of
Rs.3,16,843/-. The aforesaid amount has been divided into 60 monthly
installments amounting to Rs.12,560/- of 59 installments.
08. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was working
on the post of Office Assistant Gr. III (LDC) and was due for promotion for
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:5906
4 WP-4384-2019
the post of Office Assistant Grade II. For promotion to the said post, there is
no requirement of passing of accountant training certificate, therefore, the
impugned order of cancellation/withdrawing the time pay scale and recovery
order are illegal and arbitrary. It is further argued that the aforesaid orders are
issued without giving any show-cause notice or opportunity of hearing to the
petitioner, thus, the impugned orders are also violative of principles of
natural justice.
09. Per contra, counsel for the respondents supported the impugned
orders and submitted that as per Circular dated 25.05.2001, the petitioner was
not having qualification of accountant training (passed certificate) then the
District Pension Officer, Indore vide letter No.1890 dated 22.12.2015 and
Divisional Director, Treasury & Accounts (Pension), Indore vide letter
No.2128 dated 25.07.2016 on the basis of the Circular dated 25.05.2001 had
directed that for promotion to the post of Assistant Grade II, Accountant,
passing of accountant training is an essential criteria. Since the petitioner was
not having the accountant training passed certificate, therefore, the petitioner
was not entitled for the time scale pay which was granted to him due to
mistake. On the objection of the treasury, the correct pay fixation has been
issued and the excess amount has been directed to be recovered.
10. Upon perusal of the Rule 15 (1)(b) of Rules of Madhya Pradesh
Class-III (Ministerial Class) Service Recruitment Rules, 2000, it is evident
that the account training passed certificate is essential for the post of
Accountant and the higher post from accountant. The relevant Rule reads as
under:-
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:5906
5 WP-4384-2019
15. पदो नित हे तु पा ता क शत (1) (क) उप िनयम (2) के
उपबंध के अ यधीन रहते हुए सिमित उन सभी य य के
मामल पर वचार करे गी, ज ह ने उस वष को जनवर के
थम दन, उस पद पर, जससे क पदो नित, को जानी है ,
कम से कम उतने वष क सेवा (चाहे थानाप न प म या
मूल प म) पूण कर ली ह , जैसा क अनुसूची-चार के कालम
(4) म विन द है .
(ख) लेखापाल एवं उससे उ च पद पर पदो नित के िलए
लेखा िश ण उ ीण होना अिनवाय है
11. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was working as Office
Assistant Grade III and the next promotional cadre was Office Assistant
Grade II.
12. Counsel for the State could not point out any provision under the
Rules which makes account training certificate as an essential qualification
for promotion to the post of Office Assistant Grade II. Thus, the stand of the
respondent that the petitioner was not entitled for time scale pay because he
was not having accountant training passing certificate sans merit. Therefore,
the petitioner was rightly granted time pay scale by order dated 15.12.2010
(Annexure P/4&P/5). Apart from that, the impugned order of
cancelling/withdrawing the higher pay scale was passed without giving any
show-cause notice or opportunity of hearing and without following
principles of natural justice. In this regard, a reference may be made to the
order passed by the Apex Court in the case of State of Orissa vs. Dr. (Ms.)
BinaPani Dei AIR 1967 SC 1269 wherein the Apex Court has held that the
respondents are under obligation to follow the principles of natural justice
and on the said ground also the impugned order dated 10.08.2017 (Annexure
P/6) is quashed. Since it has been held that petitioner was rightly granted
time scale pay and the impugned order of cancellation/withdrawal of second
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:5906
6 WP-4384-2019
higher pay scale has already been quashed, the consequential recovery order
dated 18/01/2019 (Annexure P/11) is also quashed.
13. The petition is allowed. The order Annexure P-5 is revived and
the respondents shall make the payment as per Annexure P-5. Let the entire
exercise be done within a period of 60 days from the date of communication
of the order passed today.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
JUDGE
PK
