Narottam Prasad Yadav vs State of M.P. and Others

Sujoy Paul, J.—The petitioner is aggrieved by Annexure P/1, whereby the petitioner''s pay scale was reduced and recovery is also made. Brief facts necessary for adjudication of this matter are as under:

(i) Petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher on 02.07.1974. Thereafter, on completion of 12 years of service, he was given first ''Kramonnati''. Thereafter petitioner was given second Kramonnati on completion of 24 years of service w.e.f. 19.04.1999. For this purpose, petitioner had to approach this Court by filing WP. No. 499/2005. This Court on 29.09.2005 considered the grievance of the petitioner and opined that no recovery or coercive action can be taken against the petitioner without providing opportunity of hearing to him. It was directed that benefits granted to petitioner shall continue to be paid. In case respondents intend to withdraw it, they must pass speaking order after giving opportunity to the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner again file WP No. 5152/2007 which was decided on 02.11.2007. This Court by relying on the judgment of Prerna Vs. State of M.P. passed in WP No. 6773/2006 opined that respondents must consider the case of the petitioner for grant of second time bound promotion after verifying all the facts and examine his suitability. Contempt petition was filed bearing Contempt Case No. 367/2010. This petition was disposed of on 25.04.2012 by reserving liberty to the petitioner to take legal recourse against the action of the respondents in not continuing Kramonnati scale on promotion on the post of Head Master.

In the present case, the document at page 20 makes it crystal clear that second Kramonnati benefits in the scale of Rs. 5500-175-9000 was given to the petitioner w.e.f. 19.04.1999. The petitioner was promoted as Head Master on 05.03.2003. The post of Head Master carries inferior scale of Rs. 5000-150-8000. Thus from the date of promotion as Head Master, respondents have reduced the pay scale from Rs. 5500-175-9000 to Rs. 5000-150-8000. 6th Pay Commission recommendations were made applicable w.e.f. from 01.01.2006. These recommendations were given effect to qua petitioner by revising his pay scale corresponding to the pay scale Rs. 5000-150-8000.

Shri G.S. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on promotion, Kramonnati benefits could not have been taken away. In addition, he submits that 6th Pay Commission scale should be revised scale of Rs. 5500-9000. He relied on the recent judgment of this Court in WP No. 164/2009 (Noor Mohamad Vs. State of M.P. and others)

Smt. Patankar on the other side submits that action was taken on the basis of audit objection. Once petitioner is promoted on the post of Head Master, he is entitled to enjoy the pay scale which is attached to the said post. Retiral benefits, as mentioned in return, have already been paid to the petitioner. It is contended that no interference is warranted by this Court.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

This Court in Ram Siya Sharma Vs. State of M.P. and Others, has considered the purpose of granting financial up-gradation, which is popularly known as Kramonnati. This Court has opined as under:-

It is settled in law that benefit of Kramonnati or financial up-gradation is granted when employee is not getting promotion for a considerable long time/stipulated period. To avoid the stagnation, he is being granted financial up-gradation, which does not involve any change of nature of duties and responsibilities. In other words, upon grant of Kramonnati, the employee performs same nature of duties with same designation, but gets higher scale of pay.

In the case of Noor Mohamad (supra) also the benefits of Kramonnati is granted from 19.04.1999 in the scale of Rs. 5500-9000 which was taken away on promotion in 2003 on the post of Head Master. The facts of the said case has unique similarity with the present matter. At the cost of repetition, in the opinion of this Court, financial up-gradation is given to the employees when the employer is not in a position to provide them benefit of actual promotion within 12/24 years of service. In lieu thereof, financial up-gradation in the shape of higher pay scale is given to the employee without there being any change in nature of duties and responsibilities. Thus, pay scale granted through Kramonnati cannot be taken away on promotion. Otherwise it will defeat the very purpose of grant of Kramonnati. It is clear from the judgment of this Court in another case reported in Ram Siya Sharma Vs. State of M.P. and Others,

Considering the aforesaid, the action of the respondents in reducing the pay scale of the petitioner on promotion as Head Master cannot be approved. Resultantly, the said action and order is set aside. The petitioner shall continue in the pay scale of Rs. 5500-9000 with all consequential benefits from 19.04.1999. The respondents are required to consider the revision of the pay of the petitioner w.e.f. from 01.01.2006 corresponding to the pay scale of Rs. 5500-175-9000 and not on Rs. 5000-150-8000. On such revision, it goes without saying that petitioner''s retiral dues will also be revised and accordingly, respondents are bound to revise and recalculate the pension, gratuity and other retiral benefits of the petitioner based on the revised pay scale. This entire exercise of calculating arrears of pay, pension and gratuity must be completed within four months positively. Respondents must keep in mind that the petitioner was compelled to approach this court for almost similar reasons for three occasions. Petitioner stood retired on attaining age of superannuation on 31.01.2009. Respondents shall complete the exercise within four months from the date of communication of this order. Consequential recovery is also set aside. The entire payment be made to the petitioner within four months failing which it will carry 12% interest till date of realization. Petition is allowed. No Costs.