SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(MP) 85

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR
ANAND SINGH BAHRAWAT, J.
Surendra Singh Jatav Died Through Lrs Mrs Meena – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Madhya Pradesh And Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 23413 of 2017
Decided On : 08-05-2026

Advocates appeared:
Shri Alok Kumar Sharma - Advocate for petitioner
Shri K.K. Prajapati – Government Advocate for respondent/State.

Once a judicial order regarding service benefits and pay fixation attains finality, the state is bound to implement it in its entirety. Authorities cannot circumvent such mandates through internal departmental opinions or by applying lower wage rates contrary to the court's specific directions.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Industrial Disputes Act - Reinstatement - Back wages - Non-compliance of court order - Petitioner appointed on regular post but paid honorarium - Termination declared illegal by labour court - High Court directed notional pay fixation and arrears - Respondents failed to comply, paying only daily wages - Once a court order attains finality, authorities are bound to implement it in its entirety - Failure to grant notional fixation and regular pay scale constitutes non-compliance. (Paras 2, 5, 7, 8)

(B) Service Law - Pay fixation - Entitlement to regular pay scale - Where an employee is reinstated following an illegal termination, they are entitled to the benefit of length of service from the initial date of appointment for notional pay fixation - Authorities cannot circumvent court directions by obtaining departmental opinions that contradict the judicial mandate. (Paras 5, 6, 8)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was appointed to a regular post but was paid a fixed honorarium. Following an illegal termination, a labour court ordered reinstatement. Despite subsequent judicial directions to grant the regular pay scale and notional fixation from the date of initial appointment, the authorities failed to comply, instead paying daily wages based on a departmental opinion.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the authorities failed to comply with the previous judicial mandate, which had attained finality. The calculation of arrears and pay fixation must be based on the initial date of appointment and the regular pay scale, not on daily wages or subsequent departmental policies that undermine the court's order.

Issues: Whether the authorities were justified in failing to implement the court's directions regarding pay fixation and arrears, and whether the petitioner is entitled to the regular pay scale from the date of the labour court award.

Ratio Decidendi: Judicial orders that have attained finality are binding on the state. Authorities cannot override such orders through internal departmental opinions. The petitioner is entitled to notional pay fixation from the date of initial appointment and the regular pay scale as previously directed.

Result: Petition allowed. Respondents directed to pay regular pay scale, arrears, and interest.

Table of Content
1. petitioner challenges non-compliance with previous court orders regarding salary fixation and arrears. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. court scrutinizes evidence of non-compliance and determines that respondents failed to adhere to the mandate of prior judgment. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
3. a previous judicial order attains finality and must be fully implemented to ensure fair wages to the employee. (Para 8)
4. the court issues specific consequential directions for payment of arrears and interest following a finding of disobedience. (Para 9)

ORDER

This petition, under Article 226 of Constitution of India, has been filed seeking following relief (s):-

“(i) That, the action of respondents of not paying the salary to the petitioner from September, 2015 and not paying the regular pay scale and arrears of salary in terms of order passed by this Hon'ble Court in Writ Petition No.4791/2012 may kindly be declared as illegal and be quashed.

(ii) That, the respondents may kindly be directed to allow the petition to sign the attendance register and they may further be directed to make the payment of salary to the petitioner as ordered by this Hon'ble Court in W.P. No. 4971/2012 with arrears and they also be directed to pay the salary withheld from September, 2015.

(iii) That, respondents may kindly be directed to pay the interest on market rate for the entire amount of withheld salary.

(iv) That, the cost of this avoidable litigation may kindly be awarded to the petitioner.

(v) Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper may also be given to the petitioner along with costs.”

2. It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that original petitioner was appointed on vacant and regular post of Peon after participating in the selection process vide order dated 15.11.1996 (Annexure P-1). It is submitted that instead of appointing original petitioner in regular pay scale, he was shown to be appointed on fixed honorarium of Rs.300/- p.m. Thereafter, services of petitioner were terminated by the respondents without compliance of mandatory provisions of Industrial Disputes Act. It is submitted that petitioner challenged his illegal termination by raising the industrial dispute before the State Government under provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, and on failure of conciliation proceedings, the matter was referred to the Labour Court No. 2, Gwalior for adjudication. The Labour Court No.2, Gwalior, passed the award on 03.08.2009 holding the termination of services of petitioner as illegal, found him entitled to be reinstated in service and directed the respondents to reinstate the services of petitioner without back wages (Annexure P-4). Respondent-Municipal Council challenged the award of the Labour Court by filing Writ Petition No.4978/2009 which has been dismissed vide order dated 20.09.2010. Respondents further challenged the said order before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing the SLP (Civil) No. 1486/2011 which was also dismissed vide order dated 28.01.2011. Respondents reinstated petitioner but instead of paying him the regular pay-scale or even current wages, continued to pay him wages @ 300/- p.m. Thereafter, petitioner preferred Writ Petition No.4791/2012 claiming the relief of payment of regular pay scale of the post of Peon in the revised pay scale. The said writ petition was decided by this Court by order dated 22.03.2016 and directed the respondents to give benefit of length of service to petitioner from date of appointment up till date in the matter of notional fixation of pay in the pay scale payable to the peon at the relevant point of time and also directed to pay him arrears of pay from the date of award by Labour Court and also directed to continue to pay him revised pay scale of the post of peon. It is submitted that thereafter when respondents did not comply the aforesaid directions then petitioner filed Contempt Petition bearing Conc. No.1526/2016 and petitioner submitted several representations but respo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top