IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA &

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRADEEP MITTAL

th

ON THE 25 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 WRIT APPEAL No. 583 of 2024 RAJESH PRASAD PANDEY AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Sanjay Kumar Verma - Advocate for appellant.

Shri Ritwik Parashar - Government Advocate for respondent/State.

ORDER Per: Justice Pradeep Mittal The appellant has filed the present writ appeal challenging the order dated 30.11.2023 passed by Writ Court in Wrti Petition No.7870/2018 whereby the said writ petition has been dismissed holding that since the petitioners were not appointed in the year 2008 and were subsequently given appointment only by order dated 13.01.2017 therefore, they are not entitled for backwages from the date when other candidates were selected and were appointed.

2. The writ appeal is barred by 4 days, thus I.A. No.3312/2024 has been filed seeking condonation of delay.

3. For the reasons mentioned in the I.A. No.3312/2024, same is allowed.

4. The delay in filing the writ appeal is hereby condoned.

5. The appellants were initially appointed as daily rated employees in the year 1980 and had rendered more than 20 years of continuous service. In view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi, reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1, the State Government took a one-time decision to regularize/appoint eligible daily wage employees to the post of Forest Guard. Accordingly, the Chief Conservator of Forest issued a communication dated 16.09.2008 notifying 1500 vacant posts of Forest Guard, out of which 1006 posts were to be filled after completing necessary formalities.

6. The appellants applied pursuant to the said notification and successfully cleared the written examination, interview and physical test. As per communication dated 03.11.2008 issued by the Chief Conservator of Forest, Rewa Circle, out of 262 candidates who appeared, 217 candidates were declared successful. Though 89 candidates were appointed and 92 posts were still lying vacant, the appellants, despite being included in the selection list and directed to submit their testimonials for verification, were not issued appointment orders. The validity of the selection list was extended by order dated 28.05.2010.

7. Subsequently, the appellants were issued appointment orders dated 26.08.2010 and joined duties after being declared physically and medically fit. However, their appointments were cancelled within a few days by order dated 09.09.2010 without assigning any reasons.

8. Aggrieved, the appellants filed W.P. No.14609/2010, which was disposed of on 12.07.2011 in terms of the order dated 28.09.2010 passed in W.P. No.8938/2009(S), wherein this Court held that preparation of a District- wise merit list was faulty and directed the respondents to prepare a State- wise merit list and grant appointment to the petitioners in accordance with their merit. The said order was affirmed by the Division Bench in W.A. No.344/2011 and further challenge by the State before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No.17125-17126/2012 was dismissed on 05.05.2015. W.A. No.201/2012 was also dismissed on 19.08.2015, thereby rendering the issue final.

9. In compliance with the aforesaid judicial directions, the State Government prepared a State-wise merit list and the appellants were appointed as Forest Guards on probation by order dated 13.01.2017. However, juniors and less meritorious candidates had already been appointed in the year 2008, the appellants were not granted seniority and arrears of pay from that date.

10. The appellants filed W.P. No.15379/2017, which was disposed of on 25.10.2017 directing the respondents to decide their representation. By order dated 26.12.2017, the State Government granted seniority to the appellants from the date on which less meritorious candidates were appointed in 2008 but denied arrears of salary for the intervening period.

11. Challenging denial