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

2026 Supreme(Online)(MP) 2086

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Mangilal Chouhan – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
WP 10605/2025



Advocates:
L. C. Patne,Advocate General

##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3151

1 W.P. No. 10605/2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT INDORE

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE JAI KUMAR PILLAI

ON THE 29TH OF JANUARY, 2026

WRIT PETITION No. 10605 of 2025

MANGILAL CHOUHAN

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER

Appearance:

Shri L. C. Patne - Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms.Swati Ukhale - GA for the respondents/State.

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article

226 of the Constitution of India invoking the writ jurisdiction of this

Court, calling in question the legality, propriety and validity of the

order dated 26.09.2024 (Annexure P/4) passed by Respondent No.1,

whereby the request of the petitioner for issuance of “No Enquiry / No

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: HARIKUMAR

NAIR

Signing time: 1/31/2026

3:39:10 PM

##PAGE2##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3151

2 W.P. No. 10605/2025

Event Certificate” has been rejected on the ground of pendency of a

criminal case, resulting in non-payment of certain retiral benefits to the

petitioner after his superannuation.

2. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that while serving on the

post of Deputy Director, Farmer Welfare and Agricultural Development,

District Sagar, the petitioner was subjected to departmental proceedings

vide charge-sheet dated 31.10.2024, alleging misuse of official position

and extension of undue benefit to certain seed production committees,

allegedly involving financial irregularities. In the said departmental

enquiry, both charges were found partially proved by the Enquiry

Officer. However, no financial loss to the public exchequer was found

to have been caused on account of the petitioner’s acts. Consequently,

vide order dated 22.12.2016 (Annexure P/1), respondent No.1 imposed

a minor penalty of withholding of three increments without cumulative

effect.

3. On the same set of facts, an FIR bearing Crime No.246/2015 was

registered against the petitioner at Police Station Sanodha, District

Sagar, for offences under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal

Code. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the petitioner

before the Court of learned JMFC, Sagar on 30.11.2019. The said

criminal case is registered as RCT No.2381/2019 and is pending,

wherein charges are yet to be framed. Vide order dated 09.10.2023

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: HARIKUMAR

NAIR

Signing time: 1/31/2026

3:39:10 PM

##PAGE3##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3151

3 W.P. No. 10605/2025

(Annexure P/2), respondent No.1 directed that the petitioner be retired

upon attaining the age of superannuation of 62 years from the post of

Deputy Director, Farmer Welfare and Agriculture Development,

District Khargone, w.e.f. 31.05.2024.

4. The petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 31.05.2024.

Despite pendency of judicial proceedings within the meaning of Rule 9

of the M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976, only provisional

pension has been sanctioned to him, whereas provisional gratuity @

50% under Rule 64 of the said Rules, full leave encashment, Family

Benefit Fund (FBF), Group Insurance Scheme (GIS) and other retiral

dues have not been paid. The petitioner submitted that in view of the

law laid down by this Court in Banshilal Shrivastava v. State of M.P.

& Others W.P. No. 917/2011, decided on 07.12.2011 (Annexure P/3),

as followed in Dr. Rajesh Kothari v. State of M.P. & Others [W.P.

No. 11771/2020, decided on 24.09.2024], he is entitled to full leave

encashment, as the M.P. Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977 do not

provide for withholding of leave encashment on account of pendency of

a criminal case.

5. It is further stated that other retiral benefits such as Family

Benefit Fund (FBF) and Group Insurance Scheme (GIS) have also not

been paid. Upon submission of representation seeking release of retiral

dues, Respondent No.1, vide impugned order dated 26.09.2024

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: HARIKUMAR

NAIR

Signing time: 1/31/2026

3:39:10 PM

##PAGE4##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:3151

4 W.P. No. 10605/2025

(Annexure P/4), refused t

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