SHYAM PARAMJAPE Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI Rakesh Parasar, Advocate for the petitioner. Ku. Sudha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer for the respondents/state. Challenging the order Annexure A/2 whereby proposing to recover Rs. 400/- per month from the pay of the petitioner with effect from 1-1-1996 and reducing his pay, petitioner has filed this petition.

(2.) PETITIONER was employed as a Sub-Engineer in the Water Resources department, Division Morena since 6-11-1995. For having undertaken family planning operation in view of certain circular issued by the State Government vide order dated 24th January, 1999 petitioner was granted two advance increments. However, when the revision of pay fixation took place, grievance of the petitioner is that the benefit of two advance increments is being taken away, his salary is being reduced and the advance increments given is being recovered. Accordingly, challenging the order reducing the pay and ordering recovery, petitioner has filed this petition.

(3.) IT is the case of the petitioner that even when revision of pay scale took place, two advance increments have to be added and pay fixed which having been not done, petitioner has filed this petition claiming benefit on the basis of certain judgment rendered by a Bench of State Administrative Tribunal in O. A. No. 415/92 vide Annexure A/3.