Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
Kamla Gautam – Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER :
VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA, J.
1.The petitioner is not aggrieved by any particular order, but is aggrieved by illegal and arbitrary inaction on the part of the Respondents in not extending her benefit of Selection Grade Pay Scale of Rs. 3700-5700/ -(revised to Rs. 12,000-18,300/- w.e.f. 1.1.1996) w.e.f. 4.3.1998, in accordance with the judgment rendered by this Hon’ble Court in the case of Dr. Pradeep S. Panwar v. State of M.P. & Others [W.P. No. 2020/2016, decided on 4.10.2018] as implemented by Respondent No. 1 - department by issuing clarificatory Circular dated 13.12.2019 read with earlier Circular dated 11.10.1999 and 9.11.1999. The petitioner is further aggrieved by the consequential inaction on the part of the Respondents in not granting the petitioner benefit of Pay Band IV i.e. placement in the pay scale of Rs. 37,400-67,000/- + AGP 9,000/- w.e.f, 1.1.2006, after completion of 3 years of service in the selection grade pay scale or w.e.f. 1.1.2006 whichever is later, in view of the provisions of Circular dated 14.9.2012 issued by the Respondent No. 1 department.
2. The respondents have filed the reply and in para 2, they stated that the petitioner is entitled for selection gr
Non-communication of adverse ACRs violates Article 14, impacting the entitlement to benefits and promotions.
Uncommunicated Average ACRs cannot be used to deny benefits; all entries in ACR must be communicated to uphold principles of fairness and transparency.
The court upheld that all ACR entries must be communicated within a reasonable time, ruling that uncommunicated remarks cannot affect entitlements under service rules.
The petitioner was denied the legitimate claim of awarding selection grade due to the non-consideration of ACR of the year 2011 and consideration of ACR of the year 2007, violating her fundamental ri....
The conclusion drawn by the DPC on the petitioner's eligibility for the selection grade could not undergo a change if the gradings in the ACRs were not upgraded.
Public servants must be informed of adverse ACR entries to ensure fairness; however, significant delays in addressing such concerns may render claims inadmissible.
The court emphasized the principle of parity in treatment for similarly situated individuals, directing the authorities to grant benefits under government resolutions.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
