Harinath Prasad Saket vs State of M.P. and Others

Rajendra Menon, J.—Keeping in view certain orders passed by a Division Bench of this Court on 10.9.2013 in W.A. No. 252/2013 - Daulat Ram Rajak Vs. State of M.P. & Others, this petition is disposed of at this stage without notice to the respondents. Petitioner was initially appointed as an Assistant Teacher vide order dated 7.9.1977. Thereafter, w.e.f. 25.5.1990 petitioner was granted first Kramonnati in the pre revised pay scale of Rs. 1400-2640, which was revised to 5000-150-8000. On 8.8.1995 petitioner was promoted to the post of Upper Division Teacher but on the post of Upper Division Teacher there was no change in the pay scale and his pay scale continued to remain at Rs. 5000-150-8000 from 25.9.1990 upto 4.2.2009 i.e. for a period of 19 years petitioner continued in the same pay scale i.e. 5000-150-8000. Seeking upgradation/Kramonnati to the next higher pay scale of Rs. 5500-175-9000/- petitioner represented to the respondents and when the representations were not considered, he has filed this writ petition.

Shri Rahul Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, invites my attention to the Circular in question contemplating grant of upgradation i.e. Circular dated 19.4.1999 and the interpretation of the aforesaid circular as made by the Division Bench in the case of Daulat Ram Rajak (supra) and submits that the Division Bench has held in the aforesaid case that if a person continues to stagnate in one particular pay scale for more than 12 years, he is entitled for upgradation. Accordingly, it is argued that in the light of the aforesaid principle laid down by the Division Bench, petitioner is entitled for upgradation to the next higher scale of Rs. 5500-175-9000/-. The aforesaid relief is claimed in the writ petition.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on a perusal of the order passed by the Division Bench on 10.9.2013 in the case of Daulat Ram Rajak (supra) as is available at Annexure P/4, it is seen that the question involved in this writ petition was considered by the Division Bench and after taking note of the import of the Circular dated 19.4.99 the interpretation to the said circular is contained in para 8 which reads as under:-

From perusal of the aforesaid, it is apparent that the entire purpose of the scheme is to give the benefit of minimum two higher pay scale to the employees of the State Government. The opening para provides that the Government Employee in the entire service period should be extended the benefit of two higher pay scale. Apart from the pay scale on which he was appointed at the time of entering into the service. Part 2 of the said circular provides that if an employee has completed 12 years in the same pay scale, he would be entitled for higher pay scale and 2nd higher pay scale after completion of another 12 years; total 24 years. Para 2(Kha) which is relied by the learned Single Judge provides that if a Government employee after the appointment in regular service completes 24 years of service and if he is not extended more than one higher pay scale apart from the pay scale applicable at the time of entering into the service by way of time bound promotion/selection/up-gradation, he would be entitled to another higher pay scale under the scheme. Now in the light of the aforesaid factual position, the present case may be looked into.

It is therefore, clear from the aforesaid circular that the benefit of second higher pay scale has to be granted to an employee after completing 12 years of service in one particular scale. That being so, petitioner is also entitled for consideration of his claim for grant of next higher scale and the mandate of Division Bench as indicated herein above.

Keeping in view the aforesaid, it is directed that on the petitioner''s filing certified copy of this order along with relevant documents, respondents shall consider the claim of the petitioner for grant of next higher pay scale in accordance to requirement of law laid down in the case of Daulat Ram Rajak (supra) and take a decision within a period of three months. If found entitled to, benefit shall be conferred on the petitioner retrospectively with all consequential benefits. Petitioner may submit a representation along with copy of the writ petition for necessary compliance. With the aforesaid, this petition stands disposed of.

c.c. as per rules.