Madhya Pradesh High Court
WP/26220/2023 of ASHOK KUMAR SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT JABALPURBEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWALON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 26220 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
1.ASHOK KUMAR SINGH S/O SHRI JATAN SINGH,AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCCUPATION:ASSISTANT GRADE III OFFICE OF ASSISTANTCOMMISSIONER TRIBAL WORK DEPARTMENUMARIIYA DISTRICT UMARIYA (MADHYAPRADESH)AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCCUPATION:ASSISTANT GRADE III OFFICE OF ASSISTANTCOMMISSIONER TRIBAL WORK DEPARTMENUMARIIYA DISTRICT UMARIYA (MADHYAPRADESH)
2.RAJENDRA SINGH S/O DWARKA PRATAP SINGH,AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION:ASSISTANT GRADE III OFFICE OF ASSISTANTPROJECT ADMINISTRATOR UNIFED TRIBALDEVELOPMENT PROJECT BANDHAVGARHDISTRICT UMARIA (MADHYA PRADESH)AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCCUPATION:ASSISTANT GRADE III OFFICE OF ASSISTANTPROJECT ADMINISTRATOR UNIFED TRIBALDEVELOPMENT PROJECT BANDHAVGARHDISTRICT UMARIA (MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI MUNENDRA SINGH - ADVOCATE)
.....PETITIONERS
AND
1.THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGHTHE SECRETARY TRIBAL WORKS DEPARTMENTSATPURA BHAWAN R/O VALLABH BHAWNABHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)THE SECRETARY TRIBAL WORKS DEPARTMENTSATPURA BHAWAN R/O VALLABH BHAWNABHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2.THE COLLECTOR UMARIA DISTRICT UMARIA(MADHYA PRADESH)(MADHYA PRADESH)
3.ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TRIBAL WORKSDEPARTMENT SHAHDOL DISTRICT SHAHDOL(MADHYA PRADESH)DEPARTMENT SHAHDOL DISTRICT SHAHDOL(MADHYA PRADESH)
4.ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TRIBAL WORKSDEPARTM ENT UMARIA DISTRICT UMARIA(MADHYA PRADESH)DEPARTM ENT UMARIA DISTRICT UMARIA(MADHYA PRADESH)
5.BRIJENDRA SINGH S/O CHHATPAPATI SINGH,AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCCUPATION:ASSISTANT GRADE III OFFICE OF ASSISTANAGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCCUPATION:ASSISTANT GRADE III OFFICE OF ASSISTAN
COMMISSIONER TRIBAL WORKS DEPARTMENTTRIBALWORK DEPARTMENT UMARIA DISTRICTUMARIA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI SHIV KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FORRESPONDENTS NO. 1 TO 4)
This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
This petition is filed by petitioners, seeking the following reliefs, namely, issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grantthe benefit of regular pay scale after 89 days of service on Collector rate to thepetitioners with all consequential benefits along with arrears of salary withinterest @ 18% per annum.
The aforesaid relief is based on the ground that respondent No.5 wasregularised after 89 or 90 days of his joining as a daily wager, whereas,petitioners were regularised much after and, therefore, indirectly petitioners areclaiming benefit of regularisation from a retrospective date without showing theirentitlement and that too after a lapse of about 33 years.
Petition is highly belated. It is devoid of merit. Such belated and stillclaims cannot be allowed to be agitated at the sweet will of the petitioners. Nocause is shown for the delay in para 4 of the petition.
Accordingly, petition being belated, suffers from delay and laches and is,hereby, dismissed.
A.Praj.
(VIVEK AGARWAL)JUDGE