Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ranjeet Narayan Mishra vs Managing Director M.P. Purva Kshetra ... on 26 April, 2022
Author: Atul Sreedharan
Bench: Atul Sreedharan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ATUL SREEDHARAN
ON THE 26th OF APRIL, 2022
WRIT PETITION No. 12697 of 2018
Between:-
RANJEET NARAYAN MISHRA S/O LATE SHRI
SURAJ NARAYAN MISHRA , AGED ABOUT 58
YEARS, OCCUPATION: OA GRADE-II, M.P. PURVA
KSHETRA VIDYUT VITRAN CO. LTD. IN THE
OFFICE OF SENIOR ACCOUNTS OFFICER
AMAHIYA REWA DISTT. REWA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI AJEET KUMAR SINGH, LEARNED COUNSEL)
AND
1. MANAGING DIRECTOR M.P. PURVA KSHETRA
VIDYUT VITRAN CO. LTD. / SHAKTI BHAWAN
RAMPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. CHIEF ENGINEER (REWA REGION) POORVA
KSHETRA VIDYUT VITRAN CO. LTD. ARJUN
NAGAR REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (HR AND A) POORVA
KSHETRA VIDYUT VITRAN CO. LTD. SHAKTI
BHAWAN RAMPUR JABALPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
4. SUPREINTENDENT ENGINEER POORVA KSHETRA
VIDYUT VITRAN CO. LTD. M AND M CIRCLE
AMAHIYA REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. SENIOR ACCOUNTS OFFICER POORVA KSHETRA
VIDYUT VITRAN CO. LTD. AMAHIYA REWA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI RAKESH TIWARI, LEARNED COUNSEL)
This petition coming on for admission and interim relief this day, the court
passed the following:
ORDER
The present petition has been filed by the petitioner herein, who is challenging the impugned order dated 11.05.2018 and letter dated 19.03.2018 Signature Not Verified passed by the Chief Engineer, who is respondent No.2 herein by which, the SAN petitioner's representation for grant of two advance increments to which he says Digitally signed by POONAM MANEKAR Date: 2022.04.28 17:36:35 IST that he was entitled to as per the notification dated 04.04.1987. This is the second 2 visit of the petitioner to this Court. Earlier, he had filed a writ petition which was disposed of vide order dated 01.08.2017 by an innocuous order directing the respondent to decide his representation in a time bound manner. Thereafter, the present impugned order has been passed whereby his representation has been dismissed.
The petitioner is working as an Office Assistant Grade-II with the Madhya Pradesh Poorv Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Company Limited (for short "the company") in the office of the Senior Accounts Officer, Amahiya, District Rewa. The Company with which the petitioner is working is an undertaking of the State Government and is a distribution company.
As far as the notification dated 04.04.1987 of the State Government is concerned, it provides that the Engineers and the Doctors and those who have acquired Ph.D.'s would be eligible to two advance increments subject to the applicability of their post graduation/Ph.D. degrees in the work that they are doing. In other words, two advance increments were to be given where an employee acquired a post graduation degree or a Ph.D. degree and the said degree had direct nexus with the discharge of his official functions. The impugned order rejected the claim of the petitioner stating that the petitioner has acquired a Ph.D. in English, which has no applicability and does not assist in the discharge of his official function and besides that, he had not taken any permission from the Company for pursuing his Ph.D. in English.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the judgment passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Dr.Navneet Dhagat vs State of Madhya Pradesh in W.P.S. No.2665/2003 . Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the facts and circumstances of that case are directly applicable in the petitioner's case also. In that case, Navneet Dhagat had acquired Ph.D. degree in Hindi. He was working as an Office Assistant Grade-I in the Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board. His application for two advance increments was also rejected. Navneet Dhagat had sought parity with one Signature Not Verified SAN Dr.Gurusharan Prasad Pathak, who was granted the benefit of two advanced Digitally signed by POONAM MANEKAR Date: 2022.04.28 17:36:35 IST increments upon acquiring a Ph.D. degree in Hindi. However, the Electricity Board 3 rejected the claim of Navneet Dhagat on the ground that Dr.Gurusharan Prasad Pathak, who had acquired the Ph.D. degree in Hindi, was working on the post of a Translator. Therefore, there was a direct nexus and applicability of his post graduate qualification which would assist him in the discharge of his official functions. The co-ordinate learned Single Bench rejected the reason given by the Electricity Board for not granting petitioner Dr.Navneet Dhagat the benefit of two advance increments. The co-ordinate Bench held that the petitioner was on the post of Office Assistant Grade-I and in that capacity he had to prepare note- sheets. It further held that the policy of the State Government mandated in the use of "Hindi" in all official works done by the department.
Under the circumstances, the Co-ordinate Bench held that the acquisition of a degree of Ph.D. in Hindi by Dr.Navneet Dhagat had a direct nexus in the discharge of his work/function as Office Assistant Grade-I and his additional qualification would improve the efficiency of his functioning on the said post. Thereafter, the order was passed in favour of Dr.Navneet Dhagat directing the M.P. Electricity Board to grant him two advance increments. This Court is informed that the order of the learned Single Judge was challenged in a writ appeal, which was also dismissed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed before this Court another judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench passed on 22.03.2022 in W.P. No.12510/2017 (Dr.Praveen Kumar Khare vs State of Madhya Pradesh & others). In that case also, petitioner-Dr.Praveen Kumar Khare, who was working with the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board, acquired a Ph.D. degree on the subject "Social Economic Status of Labour Working in the M.P.E.B. Rewa Division (A Sociological Survey)".
The Co-ordinate Bench held that the petitioner was eligible for two advanced increments as the subject in which he has done his Ph.D., as mentioned herein above, was related to the activity of the Board. However, the factual aspects of that judgment do not reveal whether the petitioner therein was associated in Signature Not Verified handling the labour or looking after labour concerns on account of which there was SAN Digitally signed by POONAM MANEKAR a direct nexus between his Ph.D. and the work he was discharged.
Date: 2022.04.28 17:36:35 ISTLearned counsel for the respondent has drawn the attention of this Court to 4 the reply filed by him wherein, in paragraph no.3 the respondent had taken the stand that two increments have been provided to the Ph.D. degree holders in Hindi but not in English. It further stated that as the petitioner has acquired a Ph.D. degree in English, he is not entitled for two increments which he is claiming by way of the present writ petition.
Upon perusing the notification of the State Government dated 04.04.1987, the purpose of encouraging employees to acquire higher decree like post graduation in Engineering or a Doctorate was with the view of utilizing their higher qualification in the discharge of their official function thereby enhancing their efficiency and their contribution to the department. It was not a blanket proposal to grant two advance increments to any post graduation degree or Doctorate degree acquired, which had no nexus with the discharge of the functions of the employee. The nexus between the degree acquired and its use in the discharge of official function must be proximate and not remote to be eligible to receive two advance increments. Illustratively, we can say that if an Engineer working with the distribution company, acquires a post graduate degree in aviation technology, then in such a situation, he would not be eligible for two advance increments, as the post graduate degree/doctorate degree acquired by him is no way useful in discharge of his official functions with the Company whereby it would enhance its output and efficiency.
Undisputedly, the petitioner has acquired his Ph.D. in English and undisputedly, the circulars/directives of the State Government to all its departments and all its undertakings/companies are to perform their official functions in Hindi. The Ph.D. of the petitioner, which is in English and that too on the subject where the title on his thesis was "The Fiction of Kate Chopin", has no nexus whatsoever that would enhance his efficiency on the post of Assistant Grade-II.
Under the circumstances, when the notification dated 04.04.1987 is constructively interpreted, the denial of two advance increments to the petitioner on his acquiring a Ph.D. degree in English, in view of the discussions herein above, does not seem unreasonable, unjust or unlawful.
Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by POONAM MANEKARDate: 2022.04.28 17:36:35 IST Additionally, learned counsel for the petitioner has also stated that as the 5 order has been passed by an incompetent authority, the same was not his mainstay argument and appears to be more of a half-hearted attempt at setting aside the impugned order.
Under the circumstances, this petition is dismissed.
(ATUL SREEDHARAN) JUDGE pnm Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by POONAM MANEKAR Date: 2022.04.28 17:36:35 IST