Madhya Pradesh High Court
Banshilal And 6 Ors. vs Principal Secretary State Of M.P. And 5 ... on 4 February, 2025
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:2767
1 WP-7883-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
ON THE 4 th OF FEBRUARY, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 7883 of 2013
BANSHILAL AND 6 ORS. AND OTHERS
Versus
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY STATE OF M.P. AND 5 ORS. AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Manoj Manav - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Sudeep Bhargava - Dy. A.G. for respondent/State.
ORDER
The petitioners have challenged the order dated 24.06.2013 passed by the Collector, Dewas whereby thirteen process servers regularized on the post of peon were de-regularized. Out of thirteen, two filed W.P. No. 8028/2013(s) before this Court. Vide order dated 21.07.2014, the writ petition has been allowed and impugned order dated 24.06.2013 has been quashed. The order dated 21.07.2014 passed in WP No. 8028/2013 is reproduced below.
"The petitioners before this Court have filed this present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 24.06.2013 passed by the Collector, Dewas, District Dewas, by which the order regularizing the petitioners dated 30.06.2010 has been cancelled. The facts of the case reveal that the petitioners were appointed in the year 1987, 1993 respectively as Peon/ Process Server and a circular was issued on 19.10.2005 (Annexure P-3) for regularizing the Peons/Process Servers. The petitioners have further stated that pursuant to the aforesaid circular, gradation list was prepared in respect of Peons/ Process Servers serving the Dewas District and a Signature Not Verified Signed by: VATAN SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 05-02-2025 10.34.04 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:2767
2 WP-7883-2013 Committee was constituted to consider the cases of Peon/ Process Server working as daily-wagers for regularisation. The committee submitted its report and an order was passed on 30.06.2009 directing regularization of the petitioners. Petitioners have further stated that without granting any opportunity of hearing an order of regularisation was cancelled vide order dated 26-10-2010 and the petitioners being aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the State Government came up before this court by filing a Writ Petition. Writ petition was allowed vide order dated 27-08-2011 and the respondents therein were directed to grant opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and to pass a fresh order. It has been further stated that a show cause notice was issued on 13-08-2012 and thereafter respondents have passed an order dated 24-06-2013 cancelling the petitioners' regularization. Petitioners are aggrieved in the matter of cancellation of regularization. Reply has been filed in the matter and the stand of the State Government is that a circular was issued on 17-12-2008, wherein preference was to be given to serving Process Servers in the matter of appointment on the post of Process Servers/Peons and the respondents by giving erroneous interpretation of circular dated 17-12-2008 constituted a Committee to regularize the petitioners. The stand of the State Government is that the Circular dated 17-12-2008 was not meant for regularization and it was a circular meant for fresh apportionment and, therefore, they have rectified the mistake.
Respondents have placed reliance upon another Circular dated 19- 08-2010 and their stand is that the post of Process Server is a temporary post and the Process Server only works for six months in a year and, therefore, they are not entitled to be regularized. The stand of the State Government is that by virtue of the Circular dated 19-08-2010, Process Servers are not entitled to be regularized.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that the petitioners are working since 1987 and 1993, respectively. The first Circular issued by the State Government which is on record is dated 19-10- 2005. The aforesaid circular which has been issued by the State Government has issued directions to consider the cases of Process Servers working through out the State Government of Madhya Pradesh for regularization. The second Circular which has been filed alongwith the return is dated 17-12-2008. The aforesaid Circular do provides for a preferential treatment to Process Servers working as dailywagers in the matter of fresh appointments. The third circular is on record dated 19-08-2010 (Annexure-R-1). The Signature Not Verified Signed by: VATAN SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 05-02-2025 10.34.04 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:2767 3 WP-7883-2013 aforesaid circular provides that the employees working as Process Server cannot be regularized. In fact, the circulars issued by the State Government are contradictory in nature. In the first circular dated 19-10-2005 it has been categorically stated that the Process Servers are entitled for regularization.
The circular issued in the year 2008 provides that Process Servers will be given preference in the matter of fresh appointment and now the State Government has taken a somersault in the year 2010 by stating that Process Servers are working only for a period of six months. The case of the petitioners were considered by the Screening Committee for the purposes of regularization and the Screening Committee after taking into account the Circulars dated 2005 and 2008 have regularized the petitioners on the post of Process Servers.
This court is of the considered opinion that the petitioners who are working since 1987 and 1993 cannot be relegated to the status of dailywagers as they were regularized keeping in view the executive instructions issued by the State Government from time to time.
This court is of the considered opinion that the Circulars dated 19- 10-2005, which was issued exclusively for Process Servers has to be made applicable in all fairness to the Process Servers serving the State of Madhya Pradesh. Change of stand by the State Government will not extinguish the right created to the petitioners specially when the State Government has acted upon there on Circulars issued in the year 2005 and 2006.
Resultantly, the impugned order dated 24.06.2013 is hereby quashed. The petitioners shall be entitled for all consequential benefits flowing out of the order dated 19.10.2005, by which they have been regularized on the post of Process Servers. The petition stands allowed.
No order as to costs.
c.c. as per rules."
Shri Manoj Manav, Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioners submits that the said order has attained finality as the State Government has not preferred any writ appeal and those two peons are still working as regular employee in the Office of Collector, Dewas.
By virtue of order dated 21.07.2014 the petitioners are also working on the post of peon in the same office. Since the impugned order itself has been Signature Not Verified Signed by: VATAN SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 05-02-2025 10.34.04 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:2767 4 WP-7883-2013 quashed at the instance of two writ petitions, therefore, the petitioners are also entitled for the same.
In view of the aforesaid, the present Writ Petition stands disposed of. The order passed in W.P. No.8028/2013(s) dated 21.07.2014 shall be applicable mutatis mutandis in the present case also.
(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE Vatan Signature Not Verified Signed by: VATAN SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 05-02-2025 10.34.04 AM