Madhya Pradesh High Court
R.C. Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 August, 2017
WP-16158-2015
(R.C. SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
30-08-2017
Shri R.P. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri N.S. Chouhan, learned Government Advocate for the
respondents/State.
The petitioner has filed the present petition challenging the order dated 18.12.2013 passed by the Executive Engineer, P.W.D. Division No.1, Balaghat.
This is a second round of litigation. Earlier, the petitioner has approached to this Court by filing a Writ Petition No.2331/2013 contending that the petitioner was initially appointed in the office of respondent no.3 as a Time Keeper. After completion of 30 years service, the petitioner was retired from the service on 31.12.2003. During his service tenure, he was not considered for the benefit of Kramonnati under the time bound promotion scheme dated 19.04.1999. Learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, prayed that the benefit of time bound promotion be given to the petitioner in light of the judgment passed in the case of K.L. Asre Vs. State of M.P. passed in W.P. No.1070/2003 decided on 07.11.2005 which was later on upheld by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.1248/2009. This Court vide order dated 15.02.2013 disposed of the petition with a direction to the respondents to decide the claim of the petitioner in stipulated time period, but as the respondents failed to comply with the order passed by this Court, the petitioner, therefore, filed a Contempt Petition No.1444/2013 before this Court. During pendency of the contempt petition, respondent no.3 has passed the impugned order thereby fixing the pay of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the action of the respondents in fixing the pay of the petitioner at Rs.3500-5200 is discriminatory. He further submits that vide order dated 18.12.2013, the respondents have granted the benefit of first and second krammonati to the petitioner on completion of 12 or 24 years. However, from perusal of the order Annexure P-1, he has been given the benefit of only first krammonati. He further submits that the other similar situated employees i.e. K.L. Asre and Madan Gopal Sachan who have approached to this Court and the similar direction has been issued in their cases, they have granted the benefit of pay fixation of Rs.4000-6000. Thus, this action of the respondents amounts discrimination and the respondents be directed to fix the pay of the petitioner of Rs.4000-6000 as granted to the similarly situated employees. Respondents have filed their reply and in the said reply they have stated that the policy dated 19.04.1999 with regard to the grant of krammonati pay scale is not applicable to the work charged and contingency paid employees. It has further been submitted that the certain similar matters are pending in the writ appeal before this Court.
I have heard, learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Earlier, the petitioner has filed a writ petition i.e. Writ Petition No.2331/2013 before this Court praying for a direction to the respondents to consider his case in light of the judgment passed in the case of K.L. Asre (Supra). The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 15.02.2013 with a direction to the respondents to settle the claim of the petitioner in light of the judgment passed in the case of K.L Asre(supra). Accordingly, in pursuance of the direction issued by this Court, the respondents had passed an order dated 18.12.2013 thereby granting the benefit of first and second krammonati to the petitioner by fixing his pay on Rs.3500-5200, in case of the similarly situated employees who had also filed a writ petition before this Court, the respondents vide Annexure P-6 has granted them the benefit of first krammonati after completion of 12 years of service at Rs.3500-5200 and after completion of 24 years of service their pay has fixed at Rs. 4000-6000. From perusal of the said order, it reveals that the post of the petitioner as well as Shri Madan Gopal Sachan (Annexure P-6) is identical and, therefore, the respondents should have extent the benefit of pay scale of Rs.4000-6000 to the petitioner. This action on the part of the respondents amounts to the discrimination. Consequently, this writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to re-fix the salary of the petitioner similar to the K.L. Asre and Madan Gopal Sachan. Respondents are further directed to pay the arrears to the petitioner. The said exercise of re-fixation to pay be done within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
The petition is, therefore, disposed of without any order as to costs.
Certified copy as per rules.
(MISS VANDANA KASREKAR) JUDGE Tabish