RUPRAM YADAV Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri S. Tamrakar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Agrawal, Government Advocate for the State.

(2.) Petitioner has been classified as a permanent driver in accordance to the provisions of the Standard Standing Orders formulated under the M. P. Employment Standing Order Act, petitioner claims regular pay-scale attached to the post of driver.

(3.) Claim made by the petitioner is based on the principles laid down by this Court in the case of State ofM. P. vs. Hariram and ors., 2008 3 MPLJ 517 and an earlier judgment in the case of Engineer-In-Chief, P.H.E.D. and ors, vs. Budha Rao Magarde and ors., 2002 1 MPLJ 385, in the cases referred to herein, particularly in the case of Hariram (supra) in para 10 and 12 after taking note of various judgments of this Court, so also of the Supreme Court, particularly, the law laid down in.the case of Budha Rao (supra) it has been held by a Bench of this Court that classification of an employee entitles to get the pay scale to the post on which he has been classified as a permanent employee. Keeping in view law laid down in the case of Hariram (supra) and observations made in para 10 and 12 therein, there is no reason as to why benefit as claimed by the petitioner, be not granted.