Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Sitaram Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 November, 2025

         NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:29534




                                                             1                               WP-10945-2021
                             IN        THE    HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT GWALIOR
                                                           BEFORE
                                             HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ASHISH SHROTI
                                               ON THE 17th OF NOVEMBER, 2025
                                                WRIT PETITION No. 10945 of 2021
                                                   SITARAM SHARMA
                                                        Versus
                                       THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
                          Appearance:
                                  Shri Devesh Sharma - learned counsel for the petitioner.

                                  Ms. Ekta Vyas- learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State.

                                                                 ORDER

1. The petitioner has filed this petition challenging order dated 06/05/2017 (Annexure-P/2) and 21/08/2019 (Annexure- P/1), whereby the order of permanent classification of the petitioner has been cancelled by the respondents.

2 . The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was permanently classified as Permanent Labour vide order dated 19/05/2003 (Annexure-P/3). When the benefit of permanent classification was not extended to him, the petitioner filed W.P. No.2556/2025 before this Court. This Court disposed off the writ petition directing the respondents to pass suitable order in the petitioner's case keeping in view the order passed in the case of Kaluram Narwariya Vs. State of M.P. & others in W.P. No.2000/2015. When the order was not complied with, the petitioner filed a Conc. No.1051/2016 alleging non-compliance of the Court order.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:29534 2 WP-10945-2021 3 . In the meantime, respondents passed first impugned order dated 06/05/2017 (Annexure- P/2) whereby the petitioner was informed that the order of his permanent classification has been cancelled and he is being conferred with the benefit of Sthaikarmi under the policy dated 07/10/2016.

4 . The contempt petition filed by the petitioner was disposed off in National Lok Adalat vide order dated 09/09/2017 in view of the order passed by the Division Bench in the case of Madan Lal Yadav Vs. Pankaj Agarwal & others (Conc. No.859/2016). In compliance of this order another impugned order was passed by the respondents on 21/08/2019 whereby the permanent classification order of the petitioner as also others were cancelled. Challenging these two orders, the petitioner has filed this petition.

5 . The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that similar issue has been considered by this Court in the case of Kamta Prasad Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & others in W.P. No.4018/2020 , whereby the orders of cancellation of permanent classification of similarly situated persons were cancelled. He submitted that the petitioner's case is also covered by the order passed by this Court in the case of Kamta Prasad (supra). He also placed reliance upon the order of this Court passed in the case of Nattu Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & others in W.P. No.2760/2022 whereby in similar line, the writ petition was disposed off.

6 . The learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State, on the other hand, submitted that after cancellation of the permanent classification order of the petitioner, the matter was again being considered by the respondents which is evident from averments made in para "B" of the reply. She, thus, Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAHUL SINGH PARIHAR Signing time: 19-Nov-25 2:45:01 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:29534 3 WP-10945-2021 submitted that since the matter is pending before respondent authority, the petition may be disposed off.

7 . Considered the arguments.

8 . In the case of Kamta Prasad (supra), this Court was considering validity of cancellation of orders of permanent classification of employees in the similar manner. The Court found that in the earlier round of litigation, the direction issued to the respondents was to verify if the petitioner's permanent status is intact, they shall be given similar treatment as was given to the other employees. However, instead of extending the similar benefit their permanent classification order was cancelled. It was found to be in breach of the order passed by this Court in the earlier round. This Court has also observed that after lapse of so many years, respondents cannot be allowed to cancel the permanent classification of the petitioners. In the case in hand also, this Court in W.P. No.2556/2025, directed the respondents to verify the permanent status of the petitioner and if the same is found intact, the benefit was directed to be extended. However, the respondents have cancelled his classification order in the similar manner as was done in Kamta Prasad case. Thus, the order passed by this Court in the case of Kamta Prasad (supra) covers the issue involved in this case. Similar issue was considered by this Court in the case of Nattu (supra) also.

9 . In view of the aforesaid, the impugned orders dated 06/05/2017 (Annexure-P/2) and 21/08/2019 (Annexure- P1) are set-aside. The respondents are directed to confer the benefit of permanent classification to the petitioner pursuant to the order dated 19/05/2003.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:29534 4 WP-10945-2021

10. With the aforesaid, this writ petition is disposed off.

(ASHISH SHROTI) JUDGE rahul Signature Not Verified Signed by: RAHUL SINGH PARIHAR Signing time: 19-Nov-25 2:45:01 PM