LAWS(MPH)-2014-11-153

RAVINDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

Decided On November 25, 2014
RAVINDRA SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF M P Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Regard being had to the similar controversy involved in above aforesaid cases, they have been heard analogously together with the consent of the parties and a common order is being passed in the matter. Facts of Writ Petition No.264/2013(S) are narrated as under : -

(2.) It is said that Indore Bench of this Court has passed a common order in W.P.No.502/2013 and other connected cases and the controversy has been set at rest, therefore, similar order may be passed. The contention of the petitioner is that he is an employee of Janpad Panchayat under the Panchayat and Rural Development Department, State of Madhya Pradesh and he was granted a pay -scale of Rs.4500 -7000 on the basis of recommendations of 5th pay commission. The petitioner has further stated that he was transferred on deputation vide order dated 3.7.2001 to Madhya Pradesh District Poverty Initiative Project, which is a project under the control of the Government. A cabinet decision was taken earlier on 4.8.2010 for grant of a higher pay -scale to those persons whose services were being utilized by posting them on deputation. The petitioner has further stated that the petitioner vide order dated 28.2.2009 was fixed in the pay -scale of Rs.5,000 -8,000/ - in the 5th Pay commission pay scale and was also granted one higher pay scale of Rs.8,000 -13,500/ - by virtue of a cabinet decision. The petitioner has further stated that the respondents have also granted the benefit to the petitioner of higher pay -scale based upon the recommendations of 6th Pay Commission, however, w.e.f. 1.1.2006 by passing the impugned order, the aforesaid benefit has been withdrawn. The contention of the petitioner is that he cannot be singled out by the respondents in the matter of pay -scale especially when all the employees are being paid salary keeping in view the recommendations of 6th pay commission.

(3.) The respondents have filed their reply and their contention is that the petitioner is receiving the pay -scale of Rs.10,000 - 15,200/ - as per the recommendations of 5th Pay Commission, he will be entitled for the pay -scale of Rs.15,600 -39,100 + grade pay of Rs.6,600/ -. It has also been stated that the grade pay is not in existence under the 5th Pay Commission and, therefore, they are required to pay the higher pay scale. The respondents have stated that because there is an increased in the grade pay after the recommendations of 6th Pay Commission, the same cannot be implemented in respect of the petitioner.