Madhya Pradesh High Court
Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidut ... vs Kammod Singh Baghel on 24 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:23811
1 RP-1608-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ASHISH SHROTI
ON THE 24 th OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
REVIEW PETITION No. 1608 of 2025
MADHYA PRADESH MADHYA KSHETRA VIDUT VITRAN COMPANY
LIMITED AND OTHERS
Versus
KAMMOD SINGH BAGHEL
Appearance:
Smt. Somya Chaturvedi - learned counsel with Shri Ayush Chaurasiya-
learned counsel for the review petitioner.
Dr. Jitendra Singh Kushwaha- learned counsel for the respondent.
ORDER
1. The instant review petition has been filed seeking modification of order,
dated 17/07/2025, passed by this Court in W.P. No.19708/2023. They have also
filed I.A. No.7307/2025, an application seeking condonation of delay in filing this
review petition.
2. With the consent of counsel for both the parties arguments on review
petition as well as application for condonation of delay are heard.
3. This Court satisfied about the explanation given for delay in filing this
review petition. The IA No.7307/2025 is, accordingly, allowed and the delay in
filing this review petition is condoned.
4. The learned counsel for the review petitioner (respondents in writ
petition) submits that this Court was pleased to dispose off the petition vide order
17/07/2025 with following directions:-
"[8]. In view of the discussion made above, this petition is
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:23811
2 RP-1608-2025
disposed of with the following directions:
i). The respondents shall notionally fix the petitioner's salary
from the date of his termination i.e. 06.01.2009 till his
reaching the age of superannuation;
ii). The respondents shall settle his retiral dues based upon
this notional fixation of his salary from the date of his
superannuation. The petitioner is held entitled to interest on
amount of his retiral dues including arrears of pension at the
rate of 6% per annum from the date of his superannuation till
actual payment."
5. The review petitioner is aggrieved by the direction of this Court to pay
interest at the rate of 6% from the date of superannuation of the writ petitioner. The
learned counsel for review petitioner submitted that the writ petitioner was
dismissed from the service on account of his conviction in the criminal case and
became entitled for re-instatement only after passing of judgment of acquittal by
this Court on 22/06/2023. It is her submission that the review petitioner crossed
the age of superannuation in the year 2019 but at that time he was suffering
conviction in the criminal case and therefore, was not entitled for retiral benefits
also. It is her submission that only after his acquittal in criminal case on
22/06/2023, the writ petitioner became eligible for grant of any benefit. She,
therefore, submitted that direction to pay interest from the date of superannuation
of the petitioner is not warranted and at best he can be given interest from the date
of passing of the judgment of acquittal by this Court.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the writ petitioner supports the
directions issued by this Court and submitted that involvement of the petitioner in
the criminal case was ultimately found to be unjustified and, therefore, his
termination was also bad in law since inception. He, therefore, submitted that
direction for payment of interest is rightly passed by this Court.
7. Considered the arguments.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:23811
3 RP-1608-2025
8. It is a fact that the petitioner was dismissed from service on account of
his conviction in the criminal case on 06/01/2009. The conviction was set-aside by
this Court vide judgment dated 22/06/2023. Therefore, he became entitled for any
benefit only after his acquittal. The review petitioner was not at fault by not
extending benefit to the writ petitioner till he was acquitted in criminal case.
Therefore, review petitioner cannot be burdened with payment of interest prior to
22/06/2023. Therefore, the submission made by learned counsel for the review
petitioner is justified.
9. Accordingly, order dated 17/07/2025 passed by this Court in W.P.
No.19708/2023 is modified to the extent that the writ petitioner shall be entitled to
interest at the rate of 6% per annum from 22/06/2023 till actual payment of the
amount by the review petitioner.
10. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner submitted that this Court
though allowed the writ petitioner, however, inadvertently the impugned order
dated 06/02/2009 was not set-aside. The aforesaid submission is found to be
correct and therefore, it is directed that in view of the order passed in writ petition,
order dated 06/02/2009 (Annexure- P/1) shall be treated as quashed.
11. With the aforesaid, this review petition is disposed off.
(ASHISH SHROTI)
JUDGE
rahul
