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

th

ON THE 24 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 WRIT PETITION No. 28862 of 2021 SMT. KRISHNA SHARMA Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri S.K.Sharma- Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Sohit Mishra- GA for the respondents/State.

ORDER Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 13/10/2021 (Annexure P/1), whereby, benefit of two advance increments granted to the petitioner on her acquiring D.Ed. qualification has been withdrawn and a recovery of Rs.1,59,717/- has been directed against her. This Court vide order dated

3/1/2022 stayed the operation of impugned order.

2. Facts necessary for decision of this case are that petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher on 21/12/1994 and was posted at Middle School, Indaar, Block Bhadarwas, District Shivpuri.

3. The State Govt. came up with a policy for grant of two advance increments to those employees / teachers who acquired D.Ed. diploma qualification on their own expenses, vide circular dated 23/5/1994. The petitioner acquired D.Ed. qualification in the year 2001 and thus, claimed the benefit of two advance increments under circular dated 23/5/1994. When the aforesaid benefit was not accorded her, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P. No.3880/2005(s), which came to be allowed by this Court vide order dated 19/09/2005 (Annexure P/5).

4. It is thus, seen that the petitioner was held entitled for grant of two advance increments and a mandate was issued to the respondents to give her the said benefit. However, the monetary benefit was given to her w.e.f. 1/4/2004. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the benefit was extended to the petitioner in the year 2005 itself.

While fixation of petitioner's salary under the Revision of Pay Rules, 2017, the Joint Director, Treasury & Accounts Department, raised an objection with regard to grant of two advance increments to the petitioner. In view of the objection raised by the Joint Director, the impugned order has been passed on 13/10/2021, whereby, the benefit of two advance increments has been withdrawn and the recovery of amount has been directed from the petitioner. Challenging this order, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was entitled for two advance increments as per the Circular dated 23/5/1994. She was therefore, rightly granted the said benefit. He further argued that after the order passed by this Court in the earlier writ petition on 19/09/2005, the option to re-examine the matter was not available to the respondents. He thus submitted that impugned order is illegal and is in conflict with the order passed by this Court and same therefore, deserves to be set aside.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State supported the impugned action of the respondents. As per his submission vide circular dated 23/5/1994, the provision for grant of two advance increments was made to those employees / teachers, who acquired D.Ed. qualification on their own expenses. Subsequently, vide another Circular dated 27/2/1997, the said circular was clarified and it was held that only those employees who were appointed prior to 1994 are governed by the Circular dated 23/5/1994. It is his submission that while refixation of petitioner's salary under the Revision of Pay Rules, 2017, this anomaly came to the notice of Joint Director, Treasury & Accounts Department and on this objection, impugned action has been taken. He thus submitted that the petitioner was not entitled to two advance increments under the Circular dated 23/5/1994 and the same has rightly been withdrawn by the respondents. He thus, prayed for dismissal of the petition.

7. Considered the arguments and perused the record.

8. This Court in W.P. No.3880/2005 passed a specific direction to the respondents to extend the benefit of two advance increments on account of his acquiring D.Ed. qualification.