Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dewaki Nandan Soni vs State Of M.P. on 30 July, 2018
1 WP-7336-2011
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
WP-7336-2011
(DEWAKI NANDAN SONI Vs STATE OF M.P.)
2
Gwalior, Dated : 30-07-2018
Shri Anil Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Abhishek Mishra, learned Government Advocate for
respondent/State.
Petitioner's contention is that he was one of the applicant who had filed O.A.No.636/2001 which was disposed of by the State Administrative Tribunal Gwalior, Bench Gwalior alongwith O.A.No.492/2002 vide order dated 23.08.2002. It was directed that those applicants who had passed B.Ed./BTI examination at their own expenses before 1999 shall be entitled to benefit of advance increment on 01.03.1999. It is submitted that this benefit was extended to the petitioner in the Annexure P-3 and pay fixation was made accordingly. But suddenly a circular dated 14.09.2011 Annexure R-1 has been issued in which it is mentioned that this benefit of B.Ed./BTC/D.Ed. shall be entitled to only those persons who were appointed prior to 16.06.1993.
As a result of such circular, State Government has decided to recover the amount of increment already paid to the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this circular has no retrospective application and under similar facts and circumstances, coordinate Bench of this Court decided W.P.No.7355/2011 (Ashok Kumar Dixit Vs. State of M.P.) on 18.04.2017.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that coordinate Bench of this Court has quashed the recovery order and writ petition has been allowed since his case is on the same pedestal, this petition also deserves to be allowed.
Learned Government Advocate submits that recovery has been made in the light of School Education Department Circular dated 14.09.2011 which has prescribed cut of date of appointment as 01.03.1993 whereas petitioner has been appointed on 16.09.1994. It is admitted that he had passed two years D.Ed. examination on his own cost prior to 01.03.1999 but in view of circular dated 14.09.2011 recovery has been made.
Learned Government Advocate is not in a position to apprise this Court that how this circular dated 14.09.2011 shall have retrospective 2 WP-7336-2011 application. He fairly admits that there is nothing in return in regard to retrospective application of the circular. Even in the circular, it is not mentioned that it will have retrospective application.
In view of such fact, the circular dated 14.09.2011, in the opinion of this Court, has no retrospective application and, therefore, the recovery which has been ordered for the petitioner is hereby quashed.
Petition is allowed in above terms.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE Ashish* Digitally signed by ASHISH CHOURASIYA Date: 2018.07.31 17:21:08 +05'30'