WP/2585/2024 of SMT GEETA RATHI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 2 February 2024

ORDER

The present petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

1. That impugned order dated 12.05.2017 Annexure P/1 andthere consequential order time to time passed by respondentsalso may kindly be quashed.

2. That, remaining salary from date of absorption, servicebenefits and DA of the period from 22.03.2002 up to31.03.2007 may kindly be directed to be paid as the regularpay as Govt. employee to the petitioners excluding the amountalready paid and also directed to grant the benefit of the 7thpay-scale, kramonnati and other service benefits as applicabletime to time.

3. That, direction to grant of General Provident Fund (GPF)and gratuity with interest.and gratuity with interest.

4. That earned leave be directed to be paid at the time ofretirement.retirement.

5. Any other writ order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case be grantedcosts be awarded.costs be awarded.

The controversy involved in the present matter has already been decided b y co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 4th of August, 2023passed in W.P. No. 28660 of 2021 wherein in the light of the directions given incontempt petition no. 138 of 2012, the co-ordinate Bench has come to aconclusion that the petitioner therein is entitled for grant of consequentialbenefits accrued to him w.e.f. 22.03.2002 the date on which the governmenthas taken over the institution which is also the date of absorption of the teachingstaffs, For reference the order passed on 4th of August, 2023 by the Co-ordinate Bench in W.P. No. 28660 of 2021 is reproduced herein below:- This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed bythe petitioner seeking the following reliefs:-

"A. To give direction to respondents to extend the benefitof absorption with effect from the date of initialappointment i.e. 01/07/1990. Or at least with effect from22/03/2002 and grant revised regular pay scale with effectfrom initial appointment i.e. 01/07/1990 or at least witheffect from 22/03/2002 alongwith all consequential benefitsincluding seniority, yearly increment, krammonnati, andcount period for qualifying since 01/07/1990 for pensionand other retiral benefits and to grant, sanctioned and payother benefit which has been granted to other Principal ofSchool Education Department, without any discriminationof principal of school Education Department who wereappointed/promoted as principal and Petitioner who hasbeen absorbed and to sanction and pay all consequentialmonetary benefits and to pay arrears and interest uponarrears w.e.f. 01/07/1990, That Secretary of Public WelfareDepartment has issued an order dated 19/02/2013 by whichthe similar benefits has been granted to Principal of Publicwelfare department and Petitioner cannot be discriminatedon the basis Petitioner is Principal of School EducationDepartment.

B. It is therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindlybe pleased to call for the relevant record pertaining to caseof the present petitioner.

C. To award the costs of this petition from the Respondents.

D. Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fitin the facts and circumstances of the case in favour ofPetitioner and against the Respondents."in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour ofPetitioner and against the Respondents."

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has not been giventhe benefit of absorption with effect from the date of his initialappointment i.e. 22.03.2002 and has been granted the benefitwith effect from 01.04.2007.

3. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioneris posted as Principal in the Education Department and anidentical petition was filed before this Court, W.P.No.5306/2005 and in respect of the aforesaid order, a Conc.No.138/2012 was also filed in which this Court has clarifiedthe position and it has been directed that the cut off date ofabsorption will be 21.03.2002. Thus, it is submitted that sincethe respondents have also relied upon the same order, thepetitioner is liable to be given the benefit of absorption from21.03.2002 instead of 01.04.2007.

4. Counsel has also drawn the attention of this Court topara 8 of the reply filed by the respondents, which readsas under:- ^^8- ;g fd ;kfpdkdrkZ ds }kjk ih&7 ij tks vkns'k ikfjrfd;k x;k gS] mlds lEcU/k esa fuosnu gS fd ;kfpdkdrkZ dkslafonk izkpk;Z osru fn;k x;k gSA ;kfpdkdrZ ds }kjk ftlfo"k; oLrq ij ;g ;kfpdk izLrqr dh xbZ gSA ml fo"k; oLrqdk fujkdj.k ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; dh Xokfy;j ihB ds }kjkfd;k tk pqdk gSA bl lEcU/k esa ih&8 ds vkns'k fnukad 12-05-2017 esa ftu vkns'kksa dk mYys[k fd;k x;k gS] mudh izfrvuqyXud vkj&2 ij izLrqr gSA^^

5. Similarly, attention of this Court is also drawn to the orderpassed by this Court in Conc. No.138/2012, in which thisCourt has held as under-

"1. Vide order dated 12.05.2017, which has been brought -on record by the respondents-contemnors, they haveaccepted that teaching and non-teaching employees of thepetitioners Institutions shall be absorbed in respectivelocal bodies in terms of the order dated 21.03.2002 issuedby the State Government, This Court had earlier noted videorder dated 07.04.2017 that the cut off date of absorptionwill be 21.03.2002 and that has been accepted by therespondents. Therefore, all the benefits of absorptionincluding pay fixation and revision of pay made from timeto time will be applicable from 21.03.2002.

4 . Shri Vishal Mishra, learned counsel for the respondentscontemnors submits that in para 4 of the order dated12.05.2017, it is clearly mentioned that they are givenappointment on contract rates in the the local bodies w.e.f.21.03.2002. Since they have been given appointment oncontract basis in the local bodies w.e.f. 21.03.2002, the datefor entitlement for emoluments is inbuilt in this para 4 itselfand it will be 21.03.2002 only. Therefore, this Court clarifiesthat even the non-teaching staff of the Schools, which havebeen taken over, will be entitled to contract salary as revisedfrom time to time w.e.f. 21.03.2002 and not we.f. 2013 as hasbeen sought to be clarified by the respondents in a very craftymanner in the last para of the impugned order that the date ofpayment of wages on Collector rate applicable to skilledlabourers will be 21.03.2002 and the revisions madethereafter and not 2013, Shri Vishal Mishra undertakes to getthis rectified within a period of 15 days from today and onsuch undertaking, these contempt petitions stand disposed ofwith the following directions:

1 ) As has been admitted by the respondents, the date ofabsorption of both the teaching and non-teaching staff willbe 21.03.2002; and 2) Non-teaching staff will be entitled topayment of wages as are applicable to all the contractemployees from time to time w.e.f. 21.03.2002 and therevisions so made thereafter."

6. Counsel for the respondents/State, on the other hand, hasopposed the prayer, however, it is not denied that the orderpassed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.5306/2005 has not been challenged by the respondentsand the order passed by this Court in Conc. No.138/2012 hasbeen relied upon by the respondents.

7. In such circumstances, on perusal of the documents filed onrecord, this Court finds force in the submissions as advancedby the counsel for the petitioner and is of the opinion that thebenefit of absorption ought to have been given to thepetitioner with effect from 21.03.2002 as has been directed bythis Court in Conc. No.138/2012.

8 . Accordingly, the petition stands allowed and the order(Annexure P/8) dated 12.05.2017 is hereby quashed and therespondents are directed to grant all the consequentialbenefits to the petitioner accrued to him with effect from22.03.2002, within a period of three months.

9. Needless to say, the amount which has already been paid tothe petitioner shall be deducted from the amount which he isliable to receive with effect from 22.03.2002.

Petition stands disposed of."

In the light of the aforesaid view taken by co-ordinate Bench of thisCourt to which this Court fully agrees. Accordingly, the petition is herebyallowed. The respondents are directed to give all consequential benefits to thepetitioners accrued to them w.e.f 22.03.2002 within a period of three monthsfrom today.

Since certain amount has already been paid to the petitioner, the sameshall be deducted from the amount which he is liable to be received w.e.f .22.03.2002.

(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)JUDGE