Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 4]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Rambabu Agrawal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 April, 2016

                          WP-5823-2016
           (RAMBABU AGRAWAL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


01-04-2016

Mr. Vivek R. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Mrs. Sharada Dubey, learned Panel Lawyer for the
respondents/State.

With consent of the parties, that matter is heard finally. In this petition, the petitioner inter-alia seeks direction to the respondents to extend the benefit of second time pay-scale. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the controversy involved in the instant writ petition is squarely covered by an order dated 31.07.2015 passed in W.P. No.13567/2014 (Dinesh Kumar Tiwari Vs. State of M.P. and others). It is further submitted that with regard to their grievances, the petitioners be granted the liberty to submit a detailed claim to the respondents and the instant writ petition be disposed of with the direction to the respondents to consider the said representation, expeditiously.

On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents submitted that suitable decision on the representation which may be submitted by the petitioners shall be taken in accordance with law.

In view of aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and as agreed to by them, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in case petitioners submit a detailed representation to the respondents within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, the respondents shall consider and decide the said representation in the light of the order dated 31.07.2015 passed in W.P. No.13567/2014 (Dinesh Kumar Tiwari Vs. State of M.P. and others), which may be submitted by the petitioners expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such a representation of the petitioners. In case, the petitioners are found fit for grant of such benefit, the same be extended to them. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. Certified copy as per rules.

(MISS VANDANA KASREKAR) JUDGE