Smt. Bharti vs Urban Administration Development ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 9660 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Smt. Bharti vs Urban Administration Development ... on 24 September, 2025

Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla

Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla

          NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:28099




                                                            1                             WP-16083-2019
                             IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT INDORE
                                                       BEFORE
                                      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
                                              ON THE 24th OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
                                               WRIT PETITION No. 16083 of 2019
                                               SMT. BHARTI
                                                  Versus
                            URBAN ADMINISTRATION DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND
                                                 OTHERS
                          Appearance:
                                  Shri Mahesh Kumar Choudhary - Advocate for the petitioner.
                                  Shri Kushagra Jain - Dy.G.A for the respondent/State.
                                  Shri Mukul Bhutda - Advocate for the respondent No.2.

                                                                ORDER

Counsel for the respondent No.2 pleads no instruction. He submits that earlier he was representing Municipal Corporation, Ujjain but he is no longer the standing counsel of the said organization.

Counsel for the petitioner has prayed a direction for giving compassionate appointment on the ground that the mother of the petitioner

was working as "safai" employee and she was retired on 31/7/2015. As per the Rules prevailing in the corporation, in a case of retirement of a "safai karmi" appointment is given. He submits that the present petition may be disposed of in the light of the judgment passed by the Division Bench dated 12/7/2017 in W.A No.359/2017 and the order dated 19/9/2018 passed by co- ordinate Bench at Indore in the case of Mohd. Juber vs. State of M.P and Anr. in W.P No.9343/2018.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:28099

2 WP-16083-2019

The Division Bench of this court in similar circumstances passed an order on 12/07/2017 in Writ Appeal No. 359/2017 and the same reads as under :-

"Heard on the question of admission.

Writ petition praying for preferential appointment as per Rule 8A of the M.P. Municipal Corporations (Appointment and Conditions of Service of Officers and Servants) Rules, 2000 which provides for the preferential right for appointment of the legal heir of the retired employee on customary basis has been disposed of with a direction to the respondent that the case of the appellant/petitioner under Rule 8A on preferential basis will be considered as and when the vacancies arise and posts are vacant.

Learned Counsel for the appellant has drawn our attention to the Annexures P/3 to P/10 and submitted that learned Authority overlooked the preference of the appellant and made appointment to the legal heir of the other retired employee.

As per Annexure P/10, for the period from 31.7.1986 to 30.11.2011 in respect of the retired employees at Serial Nos. 1 to 14 appointment have been made as per Rule 8- A.Bayabai, who is at serial No.15 had retired on 31.7.2012 and appointment of her legal heir has been given on 26.3.2013, but no appointment order has been issued in favour of appellant.

Considering the aforesaid, the respondent No.2 is directed to consider the case of the appellant in the light of the retired employee--Bayabai wife of Arjun Bali and pass an appropriate order for appointment as per Rule 8A of the M. P. Municipal Corporations (Appointment and Conditions of Service of Officers and Servants) Rules, 2000 within a period of three months from today.

With the aforesaid, W.A. 359 of 2017 is disposed of."

In light of the aforesaid order, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner afresh in light of the order passed by the Division Bench, within a period of three months, from the date of receipt of certified

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:28099

3 WP-16083-2019 copy of this order.

The judgment delivered by the Division bench shall be applicable mutatis-mutandis in the present case also.

No order as to costs.

Certified copy as per rules.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE

PK