Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Devendra Singh Kansana vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 August, 2014

                                               Review Petition No. 205/2014

                               Devendra Singh Kansana Vs. State of MP
21/08/2014
         Shri Pavan Dwivedi, Advocate for petitioner.
         Shri Raghvendra Dixit, Government Advocate for respondents-

State.

Heard.

This Review Petition has been filed for reviewing the order dated 22-04-2014 passed in Writ Appeal No.488/2013.

This Court disposed of the aforesaid writ appeal with the following direction:-

"Hence, looking to the aforesaid facts of the case, it is directed that the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ petition shall be subject to the order that may be passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid Special Leave Petitions.

With the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of."

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the writ Court originally quashed the order, dated 21-12-2009 Annexure P-11 and directed the respondents to retain the petitioner in PHE Department and this direction shall not be affected by the observations made by this Court in the order under review.

The order passed by this Court under review is self- explanatory. In the order, it has been mentioned that the order passed by the writ Court shall be subject to the order that may be passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petitions mentioned earlier in the order. The question which is pending for determination before Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petitions is that whether after classification the employee is eligible to get relief of a regular employee. This proposition has not been disputed by learned Government Advocate.

In this view of the matter, our observations made by the order under review is that the direction issued by the writ Court that the PHE Department shall fix the seniority of the petitioner from the date of his classification as permanent employee, shall be subject to the order that may be passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. However, we have not disturbed the other directions issued by the writ Court by which the writ Court directed the respondents to retain the petitioner in PHE Department.

Review petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.

             (S.K.Gangele)                             (B. D. Rathi)
                Judge                                    Judge
MKB