Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mrs. Namita Nigam (Shrivastava) vs Principal Secretary The State Of Madhya ... on 31 July, 2023
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
ON THE 31 st OF JULY, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 337 of 2012
BETWEEN:-
MRS. NAMITA NIGAM (SHRIVASTAVA) W/O AJAY
NIGAM, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
GOVT.SERVANT 14 SHIV SHAKTI NAGAR BEHIND
ANOOP CINEMA INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI MANOJ MANAV, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER .
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
SCHOOL EDUCATION VALLABH BHAWAN
MANTRALAYA, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. THE DIRECTORATE OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR, GAUTAM NAGAR,
NEAR CHETAK BRIDGE,BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER INDORE
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(MS. BHARTI LAKKAD G.A. FOR STATE)
T h is petition coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
following:
ORDER
In the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 16.8.2010 whereby the representation of the petitioner for grant of two increments on the basis of Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 31-07-2023 17:40:41 2 passing of B.Ed. examination on her own expenses has been dismissed and respondents have denied the benefit of regular payscale from the date of initial appointment.
2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that issue involved in the present case has already been answered by this Court in the case of Asha Saxena Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh which has been affirmed by Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 3408/2008 arising out of SLP(c) No. 18881/2006 wherein it has been held that if the employee has passed the B.Ed. examination even before entrying into service on his/her own expenses, then the employee would be entitled for the benefits of increments for passing B.Ed. examination.
3. Considering the same, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to submit a representation before the competent authority along with copy of the order passed in the case of Asha Saxena (supra) along with other orders passed by other High Courts on which petitioner places reliance within a period of one month from today and if such a representation is submitted before stipulated period, the competent authority shall consider and decide the representation of the petitioner for grant of increments taking into consideration the order passed by this Court and affirmed by the Apex Court in the case of Asha Saxena (supra) within a period of three months therefrom. If it is found that the petitioner is entitled for the said benefit, the same shall be released forthwith to the petitioner and in case if it is found that the petitioner is not entitled for the same benefit, the authority shall pass a reasoned and speaking order.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 31-07-2023 17:40:41 3 MK Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 31-07-2023 17:40:41