Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 1479 (MP)

Ramesh Chandra Bansal v. State of M. P.

2013-11-28

SUJOY PAUL

body2013
JUDGMENT : Sujoy Paul, J. 1. Heard. The grievance of the petitioner is that he completed 24 years of service before 19.04.1999 and therefore, second Kramonnati should have been given to him w.e.f. 19.04.1999, the date when Kramonnati Yojna (Annexure P/1) came into being. 2. Shri Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondents have erred in granting second Kramonnati on completion of 24 years of service by Annexure P/6 dated 01.11.2006, whereas it should have been given from 19.04.1999. He relied on the judgment of this Court in W.P. No. 6773/2006(S) [Smt. Prerna W/o Shri Pramod Koranne Vs. State of M.P. and others] and also the judgment delivered in WA No. 201/2008 (State of M.P. Vs. Smt. Mala Banerji and others) and the judgment of this Court in WP No. 5542/2008 (Kamla Sahrma Vs. State of M.P.). In addition, It is contended that petitioner retired on attaining age of superannuation, but his earned leave has not been settled till date. 3. Per Contra, Mrs. Sangeeta Pachauri, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate supported the action and submits that if petitioner is aggrieved, he may prefer representation for grant of Kramonnati from 19.04.1999 and for grant of earned leave as well. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. In the considered opinion of this Court, the first question involved in this matter is no more res integra. In Prerna's case (supra) this Court has taken a view that on completion of 24 years of service, the employee needs consideration from 19.04.1999 and therefore, the said benefit, if otherwise admissible, be granted from that date. 6. The only stand taken by the respondents is that the petitioner may represent the matter and they will decide the same. In the considered opinion of this Court, such stand is erroneous. In the light of Prerna and Mala Banerji (supra) respondents are bound to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of second Kramonnati w.e.f. 19.04.1999. 7. In the opinion of this Court, on completion of 24 years of service, grant of financial upgradation is not automatic, the employee has only right of consideration under the scheme. Thus, this Court cannot directly order for grant of said benefit from 19.04.1999. Accordingly, the direction which can be issued is to consider the case of the petitioner under the scheme from 19.04.1999. 8. Thus, this Court cannot directly order for grant of said benefit from 19.04.1999. Accordingly, the direction which can be issued is to consider the case of the petitioner under the scheme from 19.04.1999. 8. Resultantly, action of respondents in granting Kramonnati from later date cannot be approved. Interest of justice would be met by directing respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of second Kramonnati w.e.f. 19.04.1999 in accordance with law. If petitioner is found fit/eligible for grant of said benefit, the said benefit shall be extended in his favour with all consequential benefits from due date. Needless to mention that if petitioner succeeds in getting second Kramonnati, it will have an impact on retiral dues. The respondents in that case shall revise and recalculate the retiral dues accordingly and make necessary payments. 9. So far the question of earned leave is concerned, it is canvassed that the respondents vide Annexure P/8 have issued a circular regarding grant of earned leave. I deem it proper to direct the petitioner to prefer representation along with Annexure P/8 and submit it before respondents No. 2 to 4 for grant of earned leave. 10. In turn, said respondents shall consider and decide the representation by a reasoned order by taking into account the Annexure P/8 and other provision in vogue. Outcome shall be communicated to the petitioner. If the said authorities come to the conclusion that petitioner is entitled for earned leave, necessary orders and payment be made within 90 days therefrom. Entire exercise of consideration for second Kramonnati w.e.f. 19.04.1999 be completed within three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. Petition Partly Allowed.