Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vasudeo Upadhyay vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 April, 2018
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE
W.P.No.6002/2016
(Vasudeo Upadhyay Vs. State of M.P.and others)
Indore, Dated 06.04.2018
Shri V.K.Patwari, learned counsel for the
petitioner.
Shri Piyush Shrivastava, learned Government
Advocate for respondent/State.
In para 5.3 of the writ petition the petitioner has specifically stated that the benefit of first Krammonati was granted to him vide order dated 29.04.1987, but the pay scale was not fixed and actual monetary benefit was not granted to him at that time.
Later on the Government has corrected the mistake and vide order dated 02.08.2014 the pay fixation has been done but the monetary benefit was not given to him, therefore he filed the present petition.
Respondents have filed brief return by submitting that Annexure P-3 was wrongly issued. The petitioner has already been granted the benefit of first Krammonati vide order dated 29.04.1987.
The petitioner has approached this Court with a specific plea that though the order was passed on 29.04.1987 but actual benefit was not granted to him. There is no para-wise reply to the writ petition and the respondents have reserved the right to file para-wise return later on. When the petition is filed and notices are issued then it is the duty of the Government to file para-wise reply at the first instance because the Officer-
in-charge of the case comes from their place of posting after leaving regular work and they also claim TA/DA. It is wastage of Court time also because after arguing the case for some time, learned Government Advocate seeks time to file additional reply or para-wise reply. No one has prevented them to file para-wise reply at the first instance.
That there is no reply of the respondent to the pleading of the petitioner that benefit of first Krammonati was granted but pay fixation was not done and monetary benefit was not granted to him. The pay fixation was done by order dated 02.08.2014. There is no dispute of entitlement of petitioner to get benefit of first Krammonati because second Krammonati has been granted to him.
In the absence of denial and para-wise reply, the writ petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to grant the benefit of first Krammonati to the petitioner alongwith consequential benefits within a period of 60 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The pension of the petitioner is also directed to be revised.
In view of the aforesaid, petition is allowed with cost of Rs.10,000/-
C.C.as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE RJ/ Digitally signed by Reena Joseph Date: 2018.04.06 17:12:40 +05'30'