PRAMOD KUMAR Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners have filed the present writ petition challenging the orders contained in Annexures P/6, P/7 and P/8. By the said orders, petitioners, who are Home Guards, are required to work for 10 months and for rest two months, their duties are called off.

(2.) Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that this Court in W.P. No.10000/2010 has specifically passed the order that system of calling off duty shall be done away with. Thereafter, matter traveled upto the Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Apex Court vide its order dated 21.01.2015 has formed an opinion that exercise of framing of Rules and Regulations is to be done by the State Government as early as possible. State Government was directed to frame appropriate Rules and Regulations regulating the working conditions of the Home Guards at any rate within a period of 8 months from the date of receipt of Court's order. Meanwhile, State was directed to continue the Home Guards honorarium. Thereafter, State framed Rules regulating the service conditions of Home Guards known as Madhya Pradesh Home Guards Rules, 2016. As per the said Rules, there is provision under Rule 27(c) that Home Guards will be called out duty for a period of 10 months and a roster will be prepared and Home Guards will be given equal opportunity for calling out duty.

(3.) It is further submitted by the counsel appearing for the petitioners that Rule 27(c) is contrary to the orders passed in the writ petitions. She further submitted that in identical matters, stay has already been granted, hence, the petitioners may be treated in parity with identically situated Home Guards.