ORDER 1. These bunch of petitions raises a common issue that petitioners who were initially appointed as Shiksha Karmi/Samvida Shala Shikshak, who were later on absorbed in the cadre of Adhyapak w.e.f. 1.4.2007, have become Government servants with formation of Rajya Shaikshnik Samvarg in the year 2018, which has three tier system of Prathmik Shikshak i.e. Primary Teacher, Madhyamik Shikshak i.e. Middle Teacher and Uchcha Madhyamik Shikshak i.e. Higher Secondary School Teacher. 2. It is submitted that since petitioners have become Government servants, they are entitled to the benefit of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976, which was applicable to all the employees of the State Government, who were appointed prior to 1.4.2005. It is submitted that since petitioners were appointed prior to 1.4.2005, therefore, on their merger with the State Government, they are entitled to the Old Pension Scheme. 3. Writ Petition No.10444/2020, Tribal Welfare Teachers Association v. State of Madhya Pradesh is taken as lead case and all the documents referred to herein, will be the documents from this petition. 4. Shri K.C. Ghildiyal, learned Senior Advocate, submits that Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Shiksha Karmis (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1997, were framed by the State Government in the year 1997. Some of the petitioners were appointed under those Rules and some others under the Samvida Shala Shikshak (Appointment and Conditions of Contract) Rules, 2001. 5. It is submitted that thereafter Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Adhyapak Samvarg (Employment and Conditions of Services) Rules, 2008, were brought into force as are contained in Annx.P/5, and there was a Scheme that Shiksha Karmi Grade-III, will be absorbed as Sahayak Adhyapak, Shiksha Karmi Grade-II as Adhyapak and Shiksha Karmi Grade-I as Varishth Adhyapak. Analogous provisions were made with regard to the Rules of 2001. Thereafter, in the year 2018, Rajya Shaikshanik Samvarg has been prepared and came in force and now there is a common cadre, namely, Rajya Shaikshanik Samvarg. 6. Analogous provisions were made with regard to the Rules of 2001. Thereafter, in the year 2018, Rajya Shaikshanik Samvarg has been prepared and came in force and now there is a common cadre, namely, Rajya Shaikshanik Samvarg. 6. Petitioner's contention is that after becoming part of Rajya Shaikshanik Samvarg, they are entitled to be treated retrospectively from the date of their initial appointent to be members of the State Civil Service entitling them to the benefits as are admissible to the civil servants under the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Pension) Rules of 1976 and to support this submission, reliance is placed on section 51 of Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Rajya Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as Act of 1993 for short). 7. Reading from section 51 of the Act of 1993, it is submitted that the State Government has been given authority to entrust to a Janpad Panchayat or Zila Panchayat functions in relation to any matter in which the executive authority of the State Government extends or in respect of functions which have been entrusted to the State governmnt by the Central Government and the Janpad Panchayat or Zila Panchayat shall be bound to perform such functions. It shall have necessary powers to perform such functions. 8. Reading Sub-section (2) of section 51 of the Act of 1993, it is pointed out that since the functions which are entrusted to a Janpad Panchayat or Zila Panchayat under Sub-section (1), the concerned Zila Panchayat or Janpad Panchayat has to act as an agent of the State Government and they are to be paid by the State Government such sum as may be deemed necessary for discharging the functions entrusted to it under this section. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained in sub-section (4) of section 52 of the Act of 1993, where, there is a provision for general control of the State Government or any other authority appointed by it, it is submitted that de facto petitioners have been employees of the State Government and, therefore, they are entitled to count for all the benefits which accrued to a civil servant under the State. 9. 9. In this backdrop, petitioners are challenging the action of the respondents in keeping them under the fold of the NPS managed by National Security Depository Limited, which is a contributory Pension Scheme floated by the State Government for those who have been appointed in the services of the State after 1.4.2005. 10. Reliance is also placed on a judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this High Court Bench at Indore in Writ Petition No.2634/2020, decided on 3.10.2023, where the issue was that whether the employees of Gram Panchayat, Janpad Panchayat and Zila Panchayat are to be treated at par with the State Government employees in respect of date of implementation of recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission and ancillary issue was under which authority, the State Government is competent to fix the date of implementation for the members of Panchayat services. 11. Petitioners' contention is that since these schools were handed over by the Government to the respective Panchayats, they did not lose their original character of the Government institutions. 12. Reading extensively from said judgment of Indore Bench, it is pointed out that a Coordinate Bench of this High Court placing reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court in State of Gujrat v. Ramanlal Keshavlal Soni [ (1983) 2 SCC 33 ], held that when personals are drawn from different sources, namely, Government departments, as well as, the local authorities or municipalities merged together to constitute a single integrited civil services under the State by a legislative enactment, would become the State Government employees irrespective of their original status. The question was answered in the affirmative. 13. The question was answered in the affirmative. 13. It is submitted that in this very judgment of Ramanlal (supra), it was noted that the Panchayat service in Gujrat constituted under section 203 of the Gujrat Panchayat Act, 1962, was a civil service of the State and members of the service were Government servants and taking that anology, Hon'ble Coordinate Bench of this Court at Indore in Writ Petition No.2634/2020, in view of the fact that the State of Madhya Pradesh has control to make rules and regulations for recruitment in Panchayats, and the servies provided to the citizens residing within a rural area, the Panchayats are constituted under Article 243-B of the Constitution, therefore, those benefits which the State Government provides to all citizens of Madhya Pradesh to various departments by recruiting employees, the same facility/services have been given by the Panchayat through its employees, held that the employees of Panchayats are also public servants and State Government employees. Thus, it is submitted that though petitioners were initially appointed under the provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Shiksha Karmis (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1997, but since initially the State Government run schools were handed over to the Panchayats, the effective and actual control being that of the State Government, they all will be treated to be the State Government servants. 14. Shri Amit Mishra, learned Panel Lawyer for the State in his turn, submits that petitioners are not entitled to any of the relief claimed by them. He admits that the reply filed in this petition is cryptic and does not answer any of the issues raised by the petitioners directly, but at the same time, he leaves no stone unturned to defend the action of the State on the ground that by no stretch of imagination, employees of Panchayat can be termed to be Government employees and even if, they are merged with the State Government as has been sought to be made out by Shri Ghildiyal, Sr. Advocate, referring to the provisions of some Scheme of 2018, by which Rajya Shaishanik Samvarg has been created, but that being after 1.4.2005, they will be still governed by the NPS and not by the Pension Rules, 1976. 15. Advocate, referring to the provisions of some Scheme of 2018, by which Rajya Shaishanik Samvarg has been created, but that being after 1.4.2005, they will be still governed by the NPS and not by the Pension Rules, 1976. 15. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, first issue is that as far as order of the Coordinate Bench passed in Writ Petition No.2634/2020, is concerned, that has been stayed by a Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 4.12.2023 in Writ Appeal No.2182/2023. 16. Secondly, on facts of the case which are narrated and reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court in case of Ramanlal (supra), it is evident that those facts are distinguishable from the facts of the present case. In that case, Panchayat service was constituted under section 203 of the Gujrat Panchayats Act, 1962 as a Civil Service under the State. That being the distinctive factor, because in the present case, the Rules of 1997, categorically provides that in exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (b) of Sub-section (1) of section 53, Sub-section (1) of section 70 read with Sub-section (1) of section 95 of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993, the State Government makes the following Rules, namely, Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Shiksha Karmis (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1997. 17. Definition Clause-2, Shiksha Karmi is defined under section 2(h) to mean a person appointed by a Zila Panchayat or Janpad Panchayat as the case may be for teaching in the schools under their control. Rule 5, deals with methods of selection and recruitment and Sub-rule (8) of Rule 5 provides that the selection committee shall be constituted consisting of members as specified in Schedule-II by the Zila Panchayat or the Janpad Panchayat as the case may be. Then the procedure has been given in Sub-rule (9) as to how suitability of the candidates will be assessed and marks will be given. These appointments are to be made on probation for a period of three years as is provided under Rule 7. 18. Rule 9 of Rules of 1997, provides that discipline and control will be that of the Zila Panchayat or Janpad Panchayat as the case may be. These appointments are to be made on probation for a period of three years as is provided under Rule 7. 18. Rule 9 of Rules of 1997, provides that discipline and control will be that of the Zila Panchayat or Janpad Panchayat as the case may be. The General Administration Standing Committee of the Zila Panchayat or Janpad Panchayat as the case may be, shall be the disciplinary authority for major punishment and the Chief Executive Officer of the Panchayat for the minor punishment. Thus, it is evident that nowhere these rules provide for constituting a service under the State Government. A distinct service has been created under the Rules of 1997, which continued in a different form in the name of Panchayat Samvida Shala Shikshak (Appointment and Conditions of Contract) Rules, 2001. Thus, this being the difference and, therefore, the law laid down in case of Ramanlal (supra), has no application to the facts and circumstances of the case. 19. As far as the M.P. Civil Services Pension Rules, 1976, is concerned, Rule 2 provides that these rules shall apply to every Government servant appointed to civil services and post in connection with the affairs of the State of Madhya Pradesh and who are borne on establishment not declared as non-pensionable. Thereafter, it is provided in Rule 2 itself that these rules, shall not apply to :-- (a) persons in a work-charged establishment; (b) persons in casual and daily rated employment; (c) persons paid from contingencies; (d) persons entitled to the benefit of Contributory Provident Fund; (e) persons employed on contract except when the contract provides otherwise; and (f) persons whose terms and conditions of service are regulated by any other rules for the time being in force. (g) Government servants appointed on or after 1st January, 2005 to the services and posts in connection with the affairs of the State, either temporarily or permanently. 20. Thus, it is evident that Clause (e) of rule 2, provides that persons employed on contract except when the conract provides otherwise are not covered under the M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976. Thus, admittedly, when petitioners were appointed on contract under the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and conditions of Service) Rules, 1997, and thereafter under the Rules of 2001 meant for Samvida Shala Shikshak, then they are not covered by the Rules of 1976. Thus, admittedly, when petitioners were appointed on contract under the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and conditions of Service) Rules, 1997, and thereafter under the Rules of 2001 meant for Samvida Shala Shikshak, then they are not covered by the Rules of 1976. Even otherwise, if petitioners were to contend that they are covered by the Rules of 1976, then they should have agitated this matter in the year 1997 or soon after their appointment, inasmuch as, Clause (f) of rule 2, provides that persons whose terms and conditions of service are regulated by any other rules for the time being in force, shall be excluded from the operation of the M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules. Thus, admittedly, these Rules of 1976, have no application to the facts and circumstances of the case. 21. Reliance of the Coordinate Bench on the provisions contained in Article 243-B, 243-C etc. is concerned, Article 243-D, defines a Panchayat as an institution of self Government constitued under Article 243-B for the rural areas. 22. Article 243-B, deals with constitution of Panchayats. It provides; (1) there shall be constituted in every State, Panchayats at the village, intermediate and district levels in accordance with the provisions of this part. 23. Article 243-C deals with composition of Panchayats and provides that subject to provisions of this Part, the Legislature of a State may, by law, make provisions with respect to the composition of Panchayats: provided that the ratio between the population of the territorial area of a Panchayat at any level and the number of seats in such Panchayat to be filled by election shall, so far as practicable, be the same throughout the State. 24. Article 243-G, deals with powers, authority and responsibilities of Panchayats. 24. Article 243-G, deals with powers, authority and responsibilities of Panchayats. It provides that subject to the provisions of the Constitution, the Legislature of a State may, by law, endow the Panchayats with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as institutions of selfgovernment and such law may contain provisions for the devolution of powers and responsbilities upon Panchayats at the appropriate level, subject to such conditions as may be specified therein, with respect to -- (a) the preparation of plans for economic development and social justice; (b) the implementation of schemes for economic development and social justice as may be entrusted to them including those in relation to the matters enlisted in the Eleventh Schedule. 25. Thus, a plain reading of Article 243-G, makes it abundantly clear that mere delegation of certain powers and authority to enable them to function as insitutions of self-government will not take away the atonomy of the Panchayat Raj institutions and they will still be autonomous in the matter of preparation of plans for economic development and social justice as may be entrusted to them. 26. Thus, when this autonomy is considered in view of the provisions contained in Article 243-I, which deals with constitution of a Finance Commission to review financial position and Article 243-J, which deals with audit of accounts of Panchayats, leaves no iota of doubt that though some grants or consideration may be rolled out to the Panchayats by the State Government, but their financial autonomy was sought to be kept intact by the framers of the Constitution and in that view, it cannot be said that the Panchayat have subrogated their authority and have merged their identity with the State government. Since their identity is not merged with that of the State Government, their employees cannot seek to get their identity merged with the State Government so to seek the benefit of pension. 27. When all these aspects are examined, then in terms of the provisions contained in Madhya Pradesh Adhyapak Samvarg (Employment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2008, it is evident that Adhyapak Samvarg has been defined in Clause 2(f), as the person employed or merged by the Zila Panchyat or Janpad Panchayat for teaching in the schools under their control. 28. 27. When all these aspects are examined, then in terms of the provisions contained in Madhya Pradesh Adhyapak Samvarg (Employment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2008, it is evident that Adhyapak Samvarg has been defined in Clause 2(f), as the person employed or merged by the Zila Panchyat or Janpad Panchayat for teaching in the schools under their control. 28. Similarly, section 2(g), defines Shiksha Karmi as a person appointed for teaching by the Zila Panchayat or Janpad Panchayat, as the case may be, under the Madhya Pradesh Panchayats Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1997. Similarly, section 2(h), defines Samvida Shala Shikshak to mean a person employed/appointed by Zila Panchayat or Janpad Panchayat as the case may be, under the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Samvida Shala Shikshak (Conditions of Employment and Contract) Rules, 2005, for teaching in the schools under their control. These three definitions leave no iota of doubt that Shiksha Karmi or Samvida Shala Shikshak or Adhyapak Samvarg is a category of persons which were meant for teaching in the schools under the control of Zila Panchayat or Janpad Panchayat. They are not under the control of the State Government and by no stretch of imagination, they can be said to be the civil servants in terms of the definition of Civil Servants given in the Fundamental Rules 2 & 3. 29. Fundamental Rule -2, provides that the Fundamental Rules apply to all Government servants whose pay is debitable to civil estimates in India. In the present case, pay and allowances of a Panchayat Shiksha Karmi or a person belonging to Adhyapak Samvarg or Samvida Shala Shikshak, is not debitable to civil estimates in India or of the State, therefore, they are not amenable to the Fundamental Rules of the State. Therefore, they being not a civil servant, Pension Rules of 1976 will not be applicable to them. 30. In view of such facts, even if, their merger in the year 2018 is taken to be with the State Government as canvassed by Shri Ghildiyal, Sr. Therefore, they being not a civil servant, Pension Rules of 1976 will not be applicable to them. 30. In view of such facts, even if, their merger in the year 2018 is taken to be with the State Government as canvassed by Shri Ghildiyal, Sr. Advocate, but for which no material is brought on record, still by virtue of the opleration of the provisions contained in clause 2(g) of the M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 as inserted vide order dated 2.4.2005, even if hypothetically petitioners are treated to be a Government servants, for which there is no material on record, still they will not be governed by the Pension Rules of 1976 and, therefore, their claim for grant of pension under the Rules of 1976, cannot be accepted. 31. Accordingly, petitions fail and are dismissed.