Madhya Pradesh High Court
Arun Prakash Dubey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51331
1 WP-7311-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK JAIN
ON THE 10 th OF OCTOBER, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 7311 of 2024
ARUN PRAKASH DUBEY
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Naveen Dubey - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Hitendra Singh - Govt. Advocate for the respondents / State.
ORDER
The present petition has been filed by retired Principal of Higher Secondary
School seeking quashing of order Annexure P-1 to the extent it denies the arrears
of salary on the promotional post of Principal Higher Secondary School and
further seeks a direction to the respondents to pay all arrears of promotional post
from the date of promotion i.e. 25.02.2012.
2. The petitioner before this Court is continuously in litigation in the
matter of his promotion from the year 1992 and umpteen rounds of litigation have
been contested upto this Court in the matter of promotion to each post by the
petitioner.
3. The petitioner for the first time filed OA No. 889/1992 before the
erstwhile State Administrative Tribunal which was transferred to this Court upon
winding up of Tribunal as WP No.7396 of 2003. The said petition was in the
matter of supersession of the petitioner to the post of Lecturer and ultimately the
said writ petition was allowed by this Court on 18.08.2025 vide order vide order
Annexure P-2. This Court in para 7 of the order directed that the petitioner's case
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51331
2 WP-7311-2024
be considered in DPC of 12.10.1990 by treating him to be senior to the
respondents No. 4 & 5 in the said petition. The relevant paragraph of the said
order is as under:-
"7. Looking to the totality of the facts and circumstances, the
respondents are hereby directed to convene review DPC and
the case of the petitioner may be considered as he was
considered in the DPC of 12.10.1990 by treating him senior
to respondents no. 4 and 5. Needless to emphasize, if the
DPC finds him suitable for promotion to the post of
Lecturer, necessary order in that regard may be passed with
all consequential, benefits from the date when Annexure A/6
dated 30.07.1991 was given. Let this exercise be done
within a period of 6 months from today.
4. Thereafter the respondents did promote the petitioner to the post of
Lecturer w.e.f. 1991 and also consequently promoted the petitioner to the post of
Principal High School vide Annexure P-4 dated 26.10.2007. Despite promoting
the petitioner as Principal High School, in para-4 of the order Annexure P-4 dated
26.10.2007 it was categorically mentioned by the respondents that the seniority of
the petitioner in the cadre of Principal, High School would be decided later on. It
is not in dispute that the said "later on" did came without intervention for this
Court and the petitioner filed Contempt Petition No.1043 of 2012 alleging
contempt of order passed WP No.7369 of 2003. The said contempt petition is
stated to be still pending before the Coordinate Bench of this Court.
5. During pendency of the contempt petition the petitioner retired on
30.09.2019 and ultimately the seniority list of the post of Principal High School
was modified and name of petitioner was placed at appropriate place, which was
done in the year 2023 during pendency of contempt petition. But since the DPC
for the post of Principal Higher Secondary School was already convened in the
intervening time i.e. on 25.12.2011, therefore, the petitioner was left out for being
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51331
3 WP-7311-2024
considered to the post of Principal Higher Secondary School w.e.f 25.05.2012 on
the date his juniors got promoted to the post of Principal, Higher Secondary
School.
6. In view of the various orders passed during the course of pending
contempt petition the respondents, as a result of modification of seniority list by
inclusion of name of petitioner at appropriate place in the seniority list of Principal
High School carried out review DPC for promotion of petitioner to the post of
Principal Higher Secondary School on 01.09.2023 and he has been found fit to be
promoted from the date of promotion of his juniors i.e. w.e.f. 25.05.2012.
However, it has been held that the petitioner would not be entitled to
consequential benefits of the promotional post on the principle of "no work no
pay".
7. The said decision of the respondents has been sought to be defended by
the respondents on the anvil of a circular issued by the General Administration
Department dated 20.03.2009 that in cases of proforma promotion the actual
wages for the period of proforma promotion are not to be paid to the concerned
employee.
8. It is a case in which the non-promotion of the petitioner was not on
account of any fault of the petitioner or on account of the petitioner being under a
legal disability to be considered for promoted or on account of respondents taking
a decision not to promote any employee. It is case where the respondents in para-4
of the order Annexure P-4 had decided not the grant seniority to the petitioner in
the cadre of Principal High School "for the present" and postponed the decision in
the matter of seniority to be decided later on, but continued to promote others
while overlooking the petitioner, as question of determination of his seniority was
kept pending. Para-4 of the order Annexure P-4 is as under:-
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51331
4 WP-7311-2024
" ी अ ण कार दब ु े का नोशनल पदो नित के दनांक 04.06.05
से पदो नित पद के वेतनमान म वेतन िनघा रत कया जायेगा,
पर तु ाचाय हाई कूल के पद पर वा त वक प से कायभार
हण करने के दनांक से पूव क अविध का काय नह ं वेतन नह ं
िस ांत अनुसार उ हे वेतन ए रयर भुगतान क पा ता नह ं
होगीा ी दबु े क ाचाय हाई कूल संवग म व र ता बाद म
िनधा रत क जावेगी"
9. It is therefore clear that the petitioner has been contesting the matter of
promotion of every post since the year 1992 onwards and the non-promotion of
the petitioner in the year 2012 along with his juniors was not on account of any
fault of the petitioner but was on account of fault or inaction of the respondents
having no relativity to any error or mistake or fault of the petitioner. The Division
Bench in this Court in WA No. 557 of 2009 has held as under:-
Principle of law emerges from the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court is that if an employee is denied benefit of
promotion arbitrarily and he was prevented to work, then he
is entitled benefit of arrears of salary also. In the present case
also the appellant was denied the benefit of promotion
without any reason. Hence, in our opinion, he is eligible to
get the arrears of salary but the question remains that
whether the appellant is entitled -the salary from the date of
his promotion i.e. 5.7.1999 or from any subsequent date. In
our opinion, the appellant is not entitled the arrears of salary
from the date of proforma promotion i.e. w.e.f. 5.7.1999
because he did not approach to the court within a reasonable
time after promotion of his junior person. He approached the
court in the year 2005 and thereafter this court passed the
order on 8.12.2006 and directed the department to consider
his case for promotion. Looking to these| peculiar facts of
the case, in our opinion, the appellant is entitled the arrears
of salary from the date of passing oft he order of this court
i.e. 8.12.2006 to the post of Assistant Homeopathic Medical
Officer of the pay scale 5000-150-8000.
10. In view of the aforesaid, since it is case where the petitioner was
denied the benefit of promotion without any reason and he had been litigating prior
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51331
5 WP-7311-2024
to that date therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, he is entitled to get
arrears of salary of the promotional post. Even otherwise the petitioner has been
working as Principal since the year 2007 and the issue is only working as Principal
of Higher Secondary School or High School.
11. Consequently, by setting aside that part of order Annexure P-1
whereby the period has been converted into no work no pay the petitioner is held
entitled to arrears of promotional post w.e.f. 25.05.2012 till his retirement and
thereafter re-fixation of pension and arrears of pension thereupon. Let the
appropriate action be completed within 90 days. The petition is disposed off .
(VIVEK JAIN)
JUDGE
nks
