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

2022 Supreme(Online)(MP) 5289

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Vikram Singh – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
WP 2524/2022



Advocates:
Arvind Kumar Sharma,Advocate General

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA ON THE 1st OF FEBRUARY, 2022 WRIT PETITION No. 2524 of 2022 Between:-

1. VIKRAM SINGH S/O NIRBHAY SINGH LABANA , AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE U.E.G.S KACHLA (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. ISHWARSINGH S/O UMRAOSINGH CHONDAWAT , AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE U.E.G.S. KAJLIYA DIST RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. MANGALSINGH S/O WALAJI KATIJA , AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE U.E.G.S. KACHLA DIST RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)

4. KRISHNA CHANDRA TANK S/O MOHANLAL TANK , AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE GOVERNMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL, MAHUDIPADA DIST RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)

5. HOORSINGH S/O JIVLA GARWAL , AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE U.E.G.S. SHALA GANGAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

6. SMT. KAMNA DAMA W/O VIRENDRA DAMA , AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE U.E.G.S. GANGAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

7. SMT. BASANTI MUNIYA W/O NARSINGH MUNIYA , AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE U.E.G.S. TADIYAPADA (MADHYA PRADESH)

8. SURENDRA SINGH RATHORE S/O TEJSINGH RATHORE , AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE U.E.G.S. TADIYAPADA (MADHYA PRADESH)

9. KALUSINGH PODWAL S/O NAHAR SINGH PODWAL , AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE U.E.G.S.

DARJANPADA (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (BY SHRI A.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner)

Signature Not Verified AND

1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER DISTRICT PANCHAYAT RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER JANPAD PANCHAYAT RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)

4. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TRIBAL AFFAIRS AND SCHEDULE CASTE WELFARE DEPARTMENT RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (BY Ms. Vineeta Phagye, learned Pl for the respondent/State.)

(Heard through Video Conferencing)

This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

By this petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for a direction to the respondents to grant benefit of first Kramonati from the date of their initial appointment according to Shiksha Karmi and Adhyapak, as they have completed 12 years of service.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that in respect of their grievances, the petitioners have already submitted representations ( collectively filed as Annexure- P/5) to the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Affairs and Scheduled Caste Welfare Department-respondent No. 4 but, the same have not been decided till now and are still pending. The prayer has been made for a direction for the representations to be decided within a fixed time period.

Learned counsel for the respondent/State submits that the representations preferred by the petitioners shall be decided in accordance with law within a fixed time frame.

In view of the aforesaid statement, it is directed that the representations( collectively filed as Annexure- P/5) submitted by the petitioners be adverted to and decided by the respondent No. 4-Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Affairs and Scheduled Caste Welfare Department Signature Not Verified District Ratlam within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order by passing a reasoned and speaking order.

With the aforesaid, without expressing any opinion on the merits, the petition stands disposed of.

C.C as per rules.

(PRANAY VERMA)

JUDGE PG/-

Signature Not Verified

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top