Madhya Pradesh High Court
WP/11597/2020 of NEELKANT PANDRE Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 8 March 2025
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY DWIVEDI
ON THE 28th OF MARCH, 2022
WRIT PETITION No. 11597 of 2020
Between:-
1.
NEELKANT PANDRE S/O SIRKUJI PANDRE , AGED
ABOUT
YEARS, OCCUPATION:
RETIRED
PRINCIPAL SAWARGAON (PANDURAN) DISTT.
CHHINDWARA (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH)
2.
OM PRAKASH TIWARI S/O SHRI NANDANLAL
TIWARI , AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
RETD HEAD MASTER GOVT BOYS MIDDLE
SCHOOL
PRATHVIPUR
DIST
TIKAMGARH
VILLAGE
AND
POST
JYORMORA
TAH
PRATHVIPUR
DIST
TIKAMGARH
(MADHYA
PRADESH)
3.
DASHRATH PRASAD LITORIYA S/O RAMNATH
LITORIYA , AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
RETD HEAD MASTER GOVT GIRLS MIDDLE
SCHOOL
TIKAMGARH
DIST
TIKAMGARH
SUBHASHPURAM CIVIL LINE DIST TIKAMGARH
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4.
RAMBHAGAT
NAMDEO
S/O
RAMBHAROSA
NAMDEO , AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
RETD TEACHER GOVT MIDDLE SCHOOL DIYADOL
SANKUL GOVT HIGH SCHOOL MAJHOLI DIST
SIDHI VILLAGE DIYADOL TAH MAJHOLI DIST
SIDHI (MADHYA PRADESH)
5.
NARAYAN PRASAD PAWAR S/O LATE SHIR BABOO
LAL
PAWAR
,
AGED
ABOUT
Page 1 of 5
YEARS,
OCCUPATION: RETD ASSISTANT TEACHER GOVT
PRIMARY SCHOOL MAGARMUHA SANKUL GOVT
HIGH SCHOOL SIREGAON BLOCK CHICHALI DIST
NARSINGHPUR
GOVT
PRIMARY
SCHOOL
MAGARMUHA SANKUL GOVT HIGH SCHOOL
SIREGAON BLOCK CHICHALI DIST NARSINGHPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(Represented by Shri S.K. Soni, Advocate)
AND
1.
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR ITS
SECRETARY VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (M.P.)
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2.
THE DIRECTOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION CHETAK
BRIDGE
GOUTAM
NAGAR
BHOPAL PUBLIC
INSTRUCTION CHETAK BRIDGE GOUTAM NAGAR
BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
3.
THE JOINT DIRECTOR TREASURY ACCOUNTS
Page 2 of 5
AND PENSION JABALPUR DIVISION TREASURY
ACCOUNTS AND PENSION JABALPUR DIVISION
JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
4.
DISTRICT PENSION OFFICER CHHINDWARA THR
DISTRICT
PENSION
OFFICER
CHHINDWARA
DISTRICT
PENSION
OFFICER
CHHINDWARA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5.
DISTRICT PENSION OFFICER TIKAMGARH THR
DISTRICT
PENSION
OFFICER
TIKAMGARH
DISTRICT
PENSION
OFFICER
TIKAMGARH
(MADHYA PRADESH)
6.
DISTRICT PENSION OFFICER SIDHI THR DISTRICT
PENSION
OFFICER
SIDHI DISTRICT PENSION
OFFICER SIDHI (MADHYA PRADESH)
7.
DISTRICT PENSION OFFICER NARSINGHPUR THR
DISTRICT
PENSION
OFFICER
NARSINGHPUR
DISTRICT
PENSION
OFFICER
NARSINGHPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
8.
THE
DISTRICT
EDUCATION
OFFICER
CHHINDWARA
THR
DISTRICT
EDUCATION
OFFICER
CHHINDWARA DISTRICT EDUCATION
OFFICER CHHINDWARA (MADHYA PRADESH)
9.
THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER TIKAMGARH
THR
DISTRICT
EDUCATION
OFFICER
TIKAM GARH DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER
TIKAMGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)
10.
THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER SIDHI THR
DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER SIDHI DISTRICT
EDUCATION OFFICER SIDHI (MADHYA PRADESH)
11.
THE
DISTRICT
EDUCATION
OFFICER
NARSINGHPUR
THR
DISTRICT
EDUCATION
OFFICER
NARSINGHPUR DISTRICT EDUCATION
OFFICER NARSINGHPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(Represented by Shri Manas Mani Verma, Government Advocate)
This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
ORDER
The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that all the petitioners got retired on 30th June of respective year 2020, 2016, 2018, 2019, 2017 but they have not been granted the benefit of the annual increment which was to be added on 1st July of respective year 2020, 2016, 2018, 2019, 2017. Counsel for the respondent-State submits that this issue is pending before the Larger Bench and also before the Supreme Court. Some of the identical
Page 3 of 5
(SANJAY DWIVEDI) JUDGE petitions got disposed of by this Court with the direction that if the issue is decided in favour of the petitioners the benefit of annual increment shall be granted to the petitioners and if the issue is decided against the petitioners, then the same would be followed. In view of the above existing scenario, rather to keep the matter pending, I find it apposite to dispose of the same. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of directing the respondent-authority that if the issue pending before the Larger Bench and the Supreme Court is decided in favour of the petitioners and they are found entitled to get the benefit of the increment which was to be added with effect from 1st July of respective year 2020, 2016, 2018, 2019, 2017 the said benefit be granted to them and the petitioners would not be required to re-approach this Court. With the aforesaid observation, this petition is disposed of. Sudesh
Page 4 of 5
SUDESH KUMAR SHUKLA Digitally signed by SUDESH KUMAR SHUKLA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, postalCode=482001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=1d5e479f08e68eda8f9271dbbe2c4b c3916264aec736f7c5f5885257f5eeaeb7, pseudonym=70EE703D36E97ABB20BA3C79C 921929E09400A16, serialNumber=7D462390C18350EF7C40811B 12AB45D82AF1259878762BAC356DCFA877F 02654, cn=SUDESH KUMAR SHUKLA Date: 2022.04.13 11:08:06 +05'30'
Page 5 of 5
Loading citations and judicial treatment…