The central legal point established in the judgment is that employees must fulfill essential qualification requirements, as per appointment orders and statutory recruitment rules, to be entitled to receive increments.

Sujoy Paul, J.

1. This Writ Appeal filed under Section 2(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchch Nyayalaya (Khand Nyay Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 is directed against the order of writ court dated 1.2.2005 passed in W.P. No. 5901/2003. The writ court by said order directed the present appellant/department to release the increments to the employee/petitioner.

2. The singular point needs consideration in this matter is whether the petitioner was entitled to get yearly increments without passing the Hindi Typing Examination? It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed by order dated 26.5.1990 (Annexure P-3). In the appointment order, condition No. 2 was inserted which makes it clear that unless the petitioner clears the Hindi Typing Examination, he shall continue to get minimum of the fixed scale and the services rendered on minimum of the scale shall not be counted for the purpose of seniority and promotion.

3. Shri MPS Raghuvanshi, learned Additional Advocate General has advanced two fold contentions to assail the order of the writ court. Firstly, it is contended that in view of clear condition in the appointment order dated 26.5.1990, the learned Single Judge has erred in directing the release of increments. Secondly, it is contended that as per statutory recruitment rules, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Recruitment Rules'), the passing of Hindi Typing Examination is a statutory requirement/minimum eligibility condition. Hence, unless the petitioner acquires the said minimum qualification and eligibility, in terms of appointment order and recruitment rules, he is not entitled to get increments. Reliance is placed on a Division Bench judgment of this Court passed in WA No. 568/2010 (State of M.P. & Others Vs. Ku. Ramani Bai Bhagat) decided on 10.7.2012.

4. Per contra, Shri Abhishek Parashar, learned counsel for the employee/petitioner supported the order of the learned Single Judge. He has placed reliance on FR-24 which prescribes that increment shall ordinarily be drawn as a matter of course unless it is withheld. He submits that in view of mandate of FR-24, the employee was entitled to get increments in due course because there is no order by any authority for withholding the increments. Interestingly, Shri Parashar also relied on the same judgment i.e., Ku. Ramani Bai Bhagat (supra). Shri Parashar also relied on a judgment of Single Judge passed in W.P. No. 3096/2011dated 27th September, 2013 delivered in Dulare Prasad Raikwar Vs. State of M.P. & Others.

5. No other point is pressed by learned counsel for the parties.

6. We have bestowed our anxious consideration on the rival contentions advanced by the parties and perused the record.

The appointment order reads as under:-

(Emphasis supplied)

7. The employee was admittedly appointed as Lower Division Clerk (LDC). As per Schedule III-A of the Recruitment Rules, the condition of passing the Hindi Typing Examination is an essential qualification. In this backdrop, it needs determination whether the employee is entitled to get increments without passing the essential qualification? It is apt to mention that a Division Bench of this Court in State of M.P. Vs. Manoj Kumar Sharma & Ors. ( : 2007 ILR (MP) 586) opined that when recruitment rules prescribe essential qualification, there is no question of grant of advance increments to the employees not having qualification and appointed after such amendment in the recruitment rules. In the said case, the relevant recruitment rules were amended in 1993 prescribing minimum qualification of B.Ed. degree. The question arose whether the employees appointed after the aforesaid amendment are entitled for increments. The Division Bench of this Court in Manoj Kumar (supra) answered the question in negative and opined that such employees are not entitled to get advance increments.

8. As per para 14 of the judgment of Ku. Ramani Bai Bhagat (supra), it appears that the condition in the appointment order regarding grant of increment w