IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI

rd

ON THE 23 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 WRIT PETITION No. 6632 of 2026 SANTOSH KUMAR KOSHTA Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Brahmendra Prasad Pathak - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Darshan Soni - Govt. Advocate for State.

ORDER The present writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wherein the petitioner has sought the following reliefs:

"7.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, direct the respondent no. 2 to 4 to extend such benefit/provide the regular pay scale to the petitioner from initial date of appointment i.e. 04.08.1993 with arrears and other consequential benefit with 12% interest, in the interest of justice. 7.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, direct the respondents to provide the consequential benefit like as Kramonnati and time pay scale in proper time/date of entitlement, after calculating his length of service and date of entitlement as per circular/policy issued by the State Authorities, in the interest of justice.

7.3 Any other relief or direction or order which the Hon'ble court may deem just and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case including the costs of the petition.."

2. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is claiming grant of regular pay scale from the initial date of appointment. The said benefit is sought in the light of the order passed by the Division Bench at Indore Bench of this Court in W.A.No.346/2008 (Smt. Usha Ranawat Vs. State of M.P. and others), dated 18-12-2008. It is contended that the Division Bench affirmed the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in various matters and, while adjudicating the writ appeals, issued the following directions in para-19:

"19. In view of the foregoing discussion, the appeal filed by writ petitions succeeds and is allowed whereas writ appeals filed by the State are dismissed in limine. Impugned order of Single Bench is modified to the extent that appellant (writ petitioner) in addition to all benefits awarded by the Single Judge in the impugned order would also be entitled to claim arrears of his salary from the date of his initial appointment. In other words, the appellant will be entitled to claim the benefit of his pay fixation i.e. regular pay scale from the date of his initiate appointment. Let the calculation be made by respondents in the light of appellants date of initial appointment and accordingly, the arrears payable to appellant towards his salary be paid to him/her in each case, which are subject matter of these appeals within a period of 6 months from the date of this order."

3. In view of the aforesaid, the respondents are hereby directed to extend the benefit of regular pay scale to the petitioner by granting notional pay fixation from the initial date of appointment, within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order. It is observed that although this Court has consistently followed the law laid down in the case of Smt. Usha Ranawat (supra) in several matters and has directed grant of notional pay fixation, arrears of pay were declined on the ground that the petitioner had approached this Court belatedly.

4. Accordingly, the respondents are further directed to extend to the petitioner the benefit of pay fixation in terms of the relief granted in the case o f Smt. Usha Ranawat (supra), including payment of arrears and other consequential benefits. However, in the event the respondents, upon due examination, arrive at a conclusion that for any reason whatsoever such benefit cannot be extended, they shall record cogent reasons for the same and duly communicate the decision to the petitioners.

5. Resultantly, the writ petition stands allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Certified copy as per rule.

(MANINDER S. BHATTI)

JUDGE ac