Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1303 (MP)

Karolina Kujur v. State of M. P.

2014-10-10

SHANTANU KEMKAR

body2014
JUDGMENT 1.The petitioner's claim grant of regular pay scale from the initial date of appointment. The benefit is claimed by the petitioner in the light of the order passed by the Division Bench at Indore Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 346/2008 (Smt. Usha Ranawat Vs. State of M.P. And others), dated 18.12.2008. 2. By the aforesaid order passed, more than 25 writ appeals claiming similar benefits were decided and it was directed that the benefit of pay fixation in the regular pay scale from the initial date of appointment shall be made to the petitioner therein. In fact, the Division Bench has upheld the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in various cases and while deciding the writ appeals in para-19 the following directions were issued by the Division Bench: “19. In view of the foregoing discussion, the appeal filed by petitioners succeeds and is allowed whereas writ appeals filed by the State are dismissed in limine. Impugned order of Single Bench is modified to the extent that appellant (writ petitioner) in addition to all benefits awarded by the Single Judge in the impugned order would also be entitled to claim arrears of his salary from the date of his initial appointment. In other words, the appellant will be entitled to claim the benefit of his pay fixation i.e. regular pay scale from the date of his initiate appointment. Let the calculation be made by respondents in the light of appellant's date of initial appointment and accordingly, the arrears payable to appellant towards his salary be paid to him/her each case which are subject matter of these appeals within a period of 6 months from the date of this order.” 3. Keeping in view the aforesaid, respondents are directed to extend to the petitioner the benefit of pay fixation as has been extended in the case of Smt. Usha Ranawat (supra), with regard to payment of arrears and other benefits also. 4. However, if on examination respondents find that for any reason whatsoever, the benefit cannot be extended, they shall record such reasons and communicate it to the petitioners. The petition stands allowed and disposed of with the aforesaid. Certified copy as per rules.