Madhya Pradesh High Court
Secretary The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs K.L.Asre on 5 March, 2013
W.A. No.630/2010
05.03.2013
Shri Rahul Jain, Deputy Advocate General, for the
appellants.
None for the respondent.
This appeal is directed against an order dated 19.01.2010 in W.P. No.13268/2007(S) by which the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and directed that the respondent's pay should be fixed in the pay scale of Rs.4000-6000 at Rs.5200 as on 19.04.1999 and accordingly the appellants were directed to calculate and pay the arrears to to the respondent along with 6% interest per annum. This order is under challenge.
Though, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants tried to assail the aforesaid order that the fixation of the pay of the respondent was rightly done but was unable to satisfy this Court that when 2nd Kramonnati was given to the respondent in the pay-scale of Rs.4000-6000, how the pay of the respondent could have been fixed in the pay-scale of Rs.3500-5200. The learned Single Judge has considered the matter at length that the respondent's pay could have been fixed in the pay scale of Rs.4000-6000 after allowing 2nd Kramonnati.
Before considering the aforesaid contention, it would be appropriate if the facts of the present case are stated.
The respondent was working in the Workcharged Establishment of the appellants and was allowed benefit of 1st Kramonnati on 05.04.2006. The respondent was allowed benefit of 1st Kramonnati and his pay was fixed in the pay- scale of Rs.575-15-800-20-880 and his pay was fixed at Rs.575 as on 05.04.1983. He was given 2nd Kramonnati in the next higher scale of Rs.4000-100-6000 and his pay as on 01.01.2000 was fixed at Rs.5200.
As the aforesaid Kramonnati was given to the respondent in compliance of order passed in W.P.(S) No.1070/2003 dated 07.11.2005 but the arrears were not granted. The respondent had filed a contempt petition before this Court which was registered as contempt case No.1985/2006 and on 05.04.2006 the contempt petition was finally disposed of with liberty to the respondent to file a fresh petition in case he was having any grievance in the matter.
The grievance of the respondent before the writ court was that even though the orders were passed in favour of the petitioner, fixing his pay at Rs.575 w.e.f. 05.04.1983 and Rs.5200 w.e.f. 19.04.1999, but the arrears were not properly calculated and were not paid to the respondent. The grievance of the respondent before the writ court was that though he was allowed pay of Rs.575 vide order Annexure P-24 and thereafter vide order Annexure P-25 at Rs.5200 but in fact the pay of the respondent was fixed at Rs.3200. The learned Single Judge considered the matter and found that when after extending the benefit of 2nd Kramonnati, he was entitled for pay-scale of Rs.4600 then his pay could not have fixed at Rs.3200 which was much below the pay for which the respondent was entitled. Vide Annexure P-25 his pay was fixed at Rs.5200 but he was paid at the rate of Rs.3200. The aforesaid order was assailed before the writ court and the writ court considering the factual position rightly directed that the respondent was entitled for pay at Rs.5200 w.e.f.
19.04.1999 and quashed the impugned order. In the impugned order, we do not find any error warranting our interference.
In view of aforesaid, this appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (M.A. Siddiqui)
Judge Judge
psm