Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 1253 (MP)

Uttam Chand Jayant v. State of M. P.

2020-12-03

S.A.DHARMADHIKARI

body2020
ORDER 1. In pursuance of the directions issued by the apex Court and Hon'ble the Chief Justice in the wake of COVID-19 outbreak , the matter was taken up through video conferencing while adhering to the norms of social distancing prescribed by the Government. 2. I.A. No.6609/2020, an application for urgent hearing is disposed of. 3. Heard finally with the consent of both the parties. 4. By invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has assailed the order dated 22.1.2015 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent No.2, whereby the benefit of grant of Kramonnati to the petitioner on completion of 12 years of service on 1.1.2002 has been denied. 5. Brief facts leading to filing of this case are that the petitioner was appointed on compassionate grounds consequent upon death of his father late R.D.Jayant who had died while in service. The petitioner was appointed as a Lower Division Clerk on 2.1.1990. His services are governed by Madhya Pradesh Excise Subordinate ClassIII (Ministerial) Service Recruitment Rules, 1983. With a view to avoid stagnation in the pay-scale, General Administration Department has formulated a policy namely Kramonnati Vetanman Scheme dated 17.3.1999/19.4.1999. As per the said scheme, the petitioner is entitled to get benefit of Ist Kramonnati on completion of 12 years of service. The petitioner completed 12 years of service on 2.1.2002. Since the petitioner was not granted the benefit of first Kramonnati, he had approached this Court in W.P. No.21758/2013 at the Principal Seat at Jabalpur along with other employees. The writ petition was finally disposed of vide order dated 15.1.2014 with a direction to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of Kramonnati within a period of three months and if it would be found that petitioners were entitled to grant of the benefit of Kramonnati, the said benefit was to be extended to them with all consequential benefits with retrospective effect. In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 15.1.2014, respondents considered case of the petitioner and turned it down vide order (Annexure P/1) saying that consideration was made on 11.12.2007 and upon considering the ACRs from 1995 to 2006, petitioner was found ineligible for the benefit, because he was subjected to with-holding of two increments w.e.f. 1.7.2006 and 1.7.2007 with cumulative effect and was also imposed upon the penalty of dies non for 231 days between 9.12.2002 to 26.7.2003 and further dies non for 2 days viz. 13.7.2000 and 2/8/2000 and one day dies non on 4/7/2001. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the consideration took place on 11.12.2007, much after 12 years' period was over and the aforesaid punishments had been inflicted without conducting any enquiry or without any notice to the petitioner. For the purpose of consideration, last five years' ACRs are required to be taken into consideration. In the case of petitioner only ACRs of last five years i.e. 1997 – 2002 ought to have been taken into consideration, whereas respondents have taken into consideration subsequent ACRs of 2002 – 2007, on the basis of which Kramonnati has been denied, which is illegal. 7. Per contra respondents/State has filed return and it is submitted by learned Panel Lawyer that the benefit of Kramonnati on completion of 12 years of service has not been granted to the petitioner due to penalties having been inflicted. As such, the petitioner was not entitled for the benefit and the same has rightly been rejected. Accordingly, the present petition is liable to be dismissed. 8. Heard, learned counsel for the parties. 9. On perusal of the impugned order dated 22.1.2015 (Annexure P/1), it is seen that while considering the case for grant of Kramonnati to the petitioner, respondents have taken into consideration the ACRs from 2002 to 2007, which is not the period in question. Petitioner completed his 12 years of service on 2.1.2002. As such, the ACRs of 1997 to 2002 ought to have been considered during which no punishment has been inflicted upon the petitioner. The penalties of dies non (3 days) of the year 2000 and 2001 have been imposed upon the petitioner without giving any show-cause notice or conducting any enquiry, which is against the settled principles of law. 10.As such, the impugned order dated 22.1.2015 (Annexure P/1) is set aside. The penalties of dies non (3 days) of the year 2000 and 2001 have been imposed upon the petitioner without giving any show-cause notice or conducting any enquiry, which is against the settled principles of law. 10.As such, the impugned order dated 22.1.2015 (Annexure P/1) is set aside. Respondents are directed to grant the benefit of first Kramonnati to the petitioner w.e.f. the date of his completion of 12 years of service i.e. 2.1.2002. The petitioner shall also be entitled to all the consequential benefits. The aforesaid benefits be granted to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 11. The petition, accordingly, stands disposed of. D.P. Singh for petitioner; Vijay Singh Sundaram, Panel Lawyer for respondents/State.