IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ASHISH SHROTI

th

ON THE 14 OF JANUARY, 2026 WRIT PETITION No. 42611 of 2025 IRSHAD KHAN Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Mr. Akshat Kumar Jain - Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Dharmendra Nayak - GA for the State.

ORDER The petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the order dated

15.09.2025, whereby his claim for grant of the fourth time-scale of pay on completion of 35 years of service has been rejected by the respondents.

2. The facts leading to filing of this petition are that the petitioner was initially appointed in the Public Health Engineering Department on 30.07.1981 on the post of Draftsman. On completion of 24 years of service, he was granted the benefit of the second Kramonnati with effect from 03.07.2006 vide order dated 31.10.2006. Thereafter, on completion of 30 years of service, the benefit of the third time-scale of pay was granted to him with effect from 01.07.2014 vide order dated 12.03.2015. The petitioner retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.06.2023. There is no dispute between the parties with regard to these facts.

3. The State Government came up with a policy for grant of fourth time-

scale of pay on completion of 35 years of service vide circular dated 14.08.2023 (Annexure P/5). The benefit under the policy was payable on completion of 35 years of service and the provisions of this policy are implemented with effect from

01.07.2023.

4. The petitioner initially raised his claim for grant of fourth time-scale of pay, however, when the same was not considered, he approached this Court by filing W.P. No.356/2025. The said petition was disposed of on 08.03.2025 by the Lok Adalat, granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a detailed representation, with a direction to the authorities to consider and decide the same expeditiously. Pursuant thereto, the impugned order dated 15.09.2025 has been passed rejecting the petitioner’s claim.

5. Challenging the said order, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the rejection of petitioner’s claim for grant of fourth time-scale of pay on the ground that the petitioner stood retired on 30.06.2023, whereas the policy was implemented with effect from 01.07.2023, is arbitrary and illegal. It was contended by him that the petitioner retired only a day after the cut-off date fixed in the circular and denial of benefit merely due to a difference of one day is illegal. In support of his submissions, learned counsel placed reliance upon the Apex Court judgment in the case of Director (Admn. and HR) KPTCL & Ors. vs. C.P. Mundinamani & Ors. reported in (2023)14 SCC 411. It is his submission that in case of increment, the service rendered by employee in the previous year was taken into account even though he had retired a day before the date on which the increment was to be applied. He submitted that, the similar analogy is to be applied in this case also inasmuch as the benefit of fourth time scale of pay is to be granted based upon 35 years of past service which the petitioner has rendered. Therefore, merely because he retired a day before the implementation of the scheme, the benefit cannot be denied to him. He thus prayed for indulgence by this court.

6. Per contra, learned Government Advocate on advance notice refuted submission made by the petitioner. He referred to paragraph - 1 of the circular dated 14.08.2023 and submitted that the policy is applicable with effect from 01.07.2023 and since the petitioner had already retired prior thereto, he is not entitled to the benefit of the said policy. He, therefore, justified the impugned order and prayed for dismissal of the petition.

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

8. The policy for grant of fourth time-scale of pay flows from circular dated

14.08.2023 (Annexure P/1). Para - 1 of the circular being relevant is reproduced hereunder :

"1. रा(cid:3)य शासन क(c