##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:57524

1 WP-14178-2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT JABALPUR BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KHOT th ON THE 29 OF JULY, 2026

WRIT PETITION No. 14178 of 2019 ASHOK KUMAR SAXENA

Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Mr. Rahul Patel - Advocate for petitioner.

Ms. Shraddha Tiwari - Panel Lawyer for State.

ORDER

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:-

"1. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the relevant records, examine the same and quash the order dt.

19.03.2019 (Annexure-5) passed by respondent no.2.

2. To issue direction to the respondents be issuance of the Writ of mandamus to give to the petitioner the pay scale equivalent given to similar situated employees A.L. Thakur (supra) Rs 515-800 from 01.04.1982, Rs.950-1530 from 01.01.1986, Rs.3050-4590 from dt. 01.01.1996 and corresponding revised pay scale including arrears from way back and interest 8 %

per annum in the interest of justice.

3. Any other order/orders/writ/writs direction/directions this

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: JULIE SINGH

Signing time: 31-07-2026

19:59:55

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:57524

2 WP-14178-2019 Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be granted in

favour of the petitioner.

4. That the cost of petition Rs.20,000/- may also be awarded to the petitioner."

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed as a Time Keeper in the Work-Charged and Contingency Paid Establishment under the Water Resources Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh, and rendered approximately forty years of unblemished service before attaining the age of superannuation on 31.08.2013. During his service tenure, the petitioner was extended the pay scales of Rs.445-635 with effect from 01.04.1982, Rs.825-1220 with effect from 01.01.1986, Rs.2750- 4400 with effect from 01.01.1996 and the corresponding revised pay scales. The Hon'ble High Court, in the case of A.L. Thakur and Others v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others, directed the respondents to extend higher revised pay scales to similarly situated Work-Charged and Contingency Paid employees. The said judgment was duly implemented by the respondents in respect of several similarly situated employees. The petitioner, being identically situated to the employees who were granted the aforesaid benefit, submitted representations seeking extension of the same pay scales. Upon failure of the respondents to consider his claim, the petitioner approached this Hon'ble Court by filing a writ petition. This Hon'ble Court, by order dated 06.03.2017, directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim and to grant him the benefit if his case was found to be fully covered by the judgment rendered in A.L. Thakur (supra). Despite the aforesaid direction,

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: JULIE SINGH

Signing time: 31-07-2026

19:59:55

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:57524

3 WP-14178-2019 the respondents failed to decide the petitioner's claim in its true perspective, compelling the petitioner to initiate contempt proceedings. However, the contempt petition came to be disposed of on the statement made on behalf of the respondents that the order of this Hon'ble Court had been complied with. Thereafter the petitioner again approached this Hon'ble Court by filing W.P. No.685/2019, wherein this Hon'ble Court directed the respondents to pass a reasoned order. Pursuant thereto, respondent No.2 passed an order dated 19.03.2019 rejecting the petitioner's claim for parity with similarly situated employees. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 19.03.2019 on the ground that the same is arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to the binding judgments of this Hon'ble Court and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the

Constitution of India.

3. It is submitted that the post of Time Keeper was re-designated as Field Assistant (St