SHIV KUMAR KANHAUA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of W.P. No.5323/2018 and W.P. No.28258/2018.

(2.) Draped in brevity, the relevant facts are that petitioner was appointed on 1.5.1986. The petitioner was working as a "Vaidya" with respondent No.5 Municipal Council, Khurai. The petitioner was dismissed from service on 10.12.1987. An industrial dispute was raised by petitioner against said dismissal order which was ultimately decided by Labour Court, Sagar in Case No.63/89/ID Reference on 13/2/1991. The termination was held to be illegal and employer was directed to be reinstated the employee with continuity of service. Petitioner was given the status of quasi permanent employee. It was further directed to grant back wages to the petitioner. The employer aggrieved by the award of Labour Court aforesaid, filed M.P. No.2818/1993. During the pendency of said petition before this Court, the employer entered into a settlement with the petitioner and on the strength of settlement arrived at, an interlocutory application was filed in the said petition. This Court entertained the said application and permitted the employer to withdraw the petition.

(3.) As per the said settlement, the employer treated the entire period of petitioner as spent on duty for the purpose of qualifying service and for the purpose of considering his claim for grant of Kramonnati. Accordingly, Kramonnati benefits were extended to the petitioner from due date. The petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.3.2017. Thereafter, by impugned order dated 12.2.2018 (Annexure P-1), the respondent opined that the petitioner rendered regular service only for a period of 18 years 28 days. The representation of employer to treat his services as regular w.e.f. 1.5.1986 were not approved by the department or the Directorate. In absence of any such decision taken by the State Government, his regular service can be counted only from 3.3.1999 and, therefore, he was entitled for only one Kramonnati w.e.f. 3.3.2011 and was not entitled to get second Kramonnati which was granted to him w.e.f. 31.3.2017. Resultantly, the excess payment arising out of grant of second Kramonnati was directed to be recovered from the petitioner. The W.P. No.5323/2018 assails this order dated 12.2.2018 and it is prayed that while setting aside this order, the respondents be directed to treat him as a regular employee w.e.f. 1.5.1986 and restore his benefit of first and second Kramonnati with all consequential benefits. In the second petition i.e. W.P. No.28258/2018, the petitioner is aggrieved by non release of pension and gratuity and prayed for a writ of mandamus for making such payments with interest on delayed payment.