Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 381 (MP)

Dharamveer Singh v. Sate of M. P.

2010-03-31

S.C.SHARMA

body2010
ORDER S.C. Sharma, J. 1. Regard being had to the similitude of the controversy involved in writ petitions Nos., W.P. No. 5765, 5766 & 5767 of 2008(S) they were heard analogously together and disposed of by this singular order. For the sake of convenience, the facts in the case of W.P. No. 5765/08(S) have been dealt with. 2. The petitioner before this Court an Assistant Professor, serving the State of Madhya Pradesh has filed this present writ petition being aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not counting his past service rendered as an emergency appointee Assistant Professor, for the purpose of grant of senior scale and selection grade from the due date. The contention of the petitioner is that an advertisement was issued by the respondents inviting the applications for the post of Assistant Professor (emergency basis) and the petitioner was recruted after following the procedure as enumerated under the Madhya Pradesh Educational Service (Collegiate Branch) Recruitment Rules, 1967. The petitioner has further stated that he has submitted his joining as Assistant Professor (Economics) on 05th January, 1987 pursuant to the appointment order dated 17th February, 1986 issued by the respondents. The petitioner has also stated that he was regularised as Assistant Professor vide order dated December, 2003 with effect from 24th December, 1998 and he fulfills all the qualifications for grant of senior scale selection grade, 'he should have been granted the same taking into account the past service rendered by him as an emergency appointee. The petitioner has further stated that 'by virtue of circular issued by the State Government dated 11.10.1999 senior grade and selection grade are granted to the Assistant Professors. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the service rendered by her as an emergency appointee while computing the total length of service has not been taken into account. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment delivered by. This Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh and others Vs. Dr. (Smt.) Seema Raizada W.P. No. 4863/2001 and prayed for a similar relief. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment delivered by. This Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh and others Vs. Dr. (Smt.) Seema Raizada W.P. No. 4863/2001 and prayed for a similar relief. 4. A reply has been filed on behalf of respondents and it is admitted in the return that the petitioner was appointed on emergency basis on the post of Assistant Professor vide order dated 17" December, 1986 as per the procedure provided Under the Recruitment Rules subject to a condition that her-regular appointment shall be done only after confirmation by the Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission. Respondents have also stated that the petitioner has been regularized in service with effect from 24th December, 1998 as per the circular issued by the State Government and the petitioner has rightly been granted the senior grade on completion of 4 years service from the date of regularization. Respondents have also stated that the petitioner will be entitled :for grant of senior grade selection grade on completion of five years of service in the senior grade. Respondents have relied upon a judgment delivered by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dr. (Smt.) Agnes Thakur and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others W.P. No. 6931/2003 (s) and prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. In the present case, it has been admitted by the respondents that the petitioner was appointed as per the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh. Educational Service. (Collegiate Branch) Recruitment Rules, 1967 as an emergency appointee and a process of selection was followed in the matter by the respondents. Keeping in view the aforesaid, the appointment of the petitioner was in consonance with the statutory provisions of Recruitment Rules 1967 and after following the prescribed procedure, the petitioner has been appointed as an Assistant Professor. It is also an admitted fact that subsequently the petitioner has been regularised with effect from 24th December, 1998 by an order dated 19th December, 2003 (Annexure P/7) and the respondents have also granted the senior grade with effect from 24th December, 2004 by an order dated 22nd August, 2005 on completion of four years service from the date of regularisation. This Court in a similar case i.e. State of M.P. & others vs. Dr. This Court in a similar case i.e. State of M.P. & others vs. Dr. Smt. Seema Raizada (supra) has held as under: 4. The respondent contends that her appointment on the post of Assistant Professor by order dated 17.12.1986 was made under Rule 13(5) of the M.P. Education Service (Collegiate Branch) Recruitment Rules, 1967. The said appointment was made after issuance of advertisement following the selection process in accordance with the provisions of Rules. In the circumstances she contends that the Tribunal has rightly directed to calculate her initial date of appointment for the purpose of grant of selection grade pay scale. 5. Having considered the above contentions, we find no merit in this petition. The respondent was appointed after due process of selection, thereafter, she was selected by the... in view of this, her appointment in the year 1986 cannot be said to be fortuitous or ad-hoc. Her appointment being after due process of selection in accordance with the rules, she was entitled for getting the same period counted for the purpose of grant of senior grade pay scale. 6. Therefore, we find no error in the order of the Tribunal. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. 6. This court in the aforesaid case has upheld the judgment delivered by the State Administrative Tribunal, directing the respondents to take into account the service rendered by Smt. Seema Raizada as emergency appointee for the purpose of grant of senior grade pay scale and also for the selection grade. 7. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of M.P. and two others vs. Dr. Deepak Raj Tiwari W.A. No. 645 of 2009 dated 11/02/2010 delivered at the Principal Seat has again affirmed the view expressed by the earlier Division Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Seema Raizada and, therefore, there appears to be no justification in not granting the senior grade and selection grade to the petitioners in the present cases. 8. 8. The case of the present petitioners also stands on similar footing, and therefore, the petitioners are also entitled to the same relief and the petitions deserve to be allowed with the following directions: (A) Respondents shall take into account services rendered by each of the petitioners from the date on which they have joined as Assistant Professor as an emergency appointee for the purpose of grant of senior grade, (B) Respondents shall also take into account the services rendered by the petitioners as an emergency appointee for grant of selection grade from the date of their initial appointment. (C) It is made clear that the petitioners shall be entitled for all the consequential benefits as has been granted to Smt. Seema Raizada by the State Government in compliance to the order passed by this Court in W.P. No. 4863/2001 State of Madhya Pradesh & others Vs. Dr. (Smt.) Seema Raizada and (supra) Dr. Deepak Raj Tiwari (supra) (D)The aforesaid exercise of review of the matter for grant of senior grade and selection grade to the petitioner shall be concluded within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 9. With the aforesaid, the writ petitions stand allowed and disposed of. No order as to cost. 10. Certified copy as per rules.