[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Hanslal Patle vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 April, 2026
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:28409
1 WP-12154-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
ON THE 10 th OF APRIL, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 12154 of 2026
HANSLAL PATLE
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Shubham Dehariya - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Hitendra Singh - G.A. for the State.
ORDER
This petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking following reliefs:-
"i. Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order, or direction, thereby
directing the Respondents to conduct the
screening process for the purpose of appointing
the Petitioner on regular Class-IV posts; and
ii. Direct the Respondents to appoint the
Petitioner on regular Class-IV posts, with all
consequential benefits, including the grant of
regular scale of pay as per rules, with effect from
the same date on which similarly situated
employees were granted such benefits, or from
any other date this Hon'ble Court may deem fit
and proper; and/or
iii. Direct the Respondents to treat the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:28409
2 WP-12154-2026
Petitioner as regular sweepers instead of part-time
sweepers and to extend to them the regular scale
of pay applicable to sweepers, with effect from
the date they completed three years of continuous
service from the date of their initial appointment,
as detailed in the writ petition;and
iv. Respondent may further be directed to
arrears of salary along with interest @12% p.a
thereon in the interest of justice.
v. Pass any other or further orders or
directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem just,
fit, and proper in the facts and circumstances of
the case, in the interest of justice."
2 . The counsel for the petitioner contends that highlighting aforesaid
grievance, the petitioner is willing to move fresh representation before respondent
No. 2/Director, Animal Husbandry and Dairy Department, Bhopal, which is
required to be considered in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in SLP (C)
No.8613/2022 (Rakesh Charmakar Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and
Ors.). Therefore, same be directed to be decided expeditiously.
3. The counsel for the State submits that appropriate decision shall be taken
on the representation of the petitioner in the light of the decision of the Apex
Court in the case of Rakesh Kumar Charmakar (Supra) .
4. In view of the aforesaid, without expressing any view on the merits of the
case, the petition stands disposed of with direction to the petitioner to submit a
fresh representation highlighting aforesaid grievance within 15 days from today
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:28409
3 WP-12154-2026
before respondent No. 2 and in such an eventuality, respondent No. 2 shall take
decision on the same in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in SLP (C)
No.8613/2022 (Rakesh Charmakar Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and
Ors.), within a period of 60 days from the date of production of certified copy of
this order by passing a well reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law.
5. If the petitioner is found entitled and there is no impediment or embargo,
the reliefs as claimed by the petitioner in the aforesaid representation be extended
to him within a further period of 30 days without compelling him to revisit this
Court for the said purpose, otherwise reasons be communicated to the petitioner
for not extending the said relief within the said period itself.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any view on the merit of
the case and respondent No. 2 shall be at liberty to deal with the representation of
the petitioner, in his own wisdom, in accordance with law.
(MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE
PB
