ABIDA QURESHI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall dispose of 15 writ petitions, being w. P. No. 1837/2009 (S), W. P. No. 1632/2009 (S), W. P. No. 1654/2009 (S), w. P. No. 1656/2009 (S), W. P. No. 1657/2009 (S), W. P. No. 1658/2009 (S), w. P. No. 1659/2009 (S), W. P. No. 1660/2009 (S), W. P. No. 1661/2009 (S), w. P. No. 1663/2009 (S), W. P. No. 1664/2009 (S), W. P. No. 1666/2009 (S), w. P. No. 1667/2009 (S), W. P. No. 1669/2009 (S) and W. P. No. 3131/2009 (S), as identical controversy arises in all these cases. The main order is being passed in W. P. No. 1837/2009 (S ).

(2.) THE petitioner had initially been appointed on the post of assistant Professor in Zoology, in the regular pay scales. She claims that the aforesaid appointment was a result of a regular selection process under the provisions of Rule 13 (5) of the M. P. Education Service (Collegiate Branch), Recruitment Rules, 1967. However, the said appointment of the petitioner was on emergency basis only. The petitioner had joined her duties w. e. f. January 16, 1989. The services of the petitioner were later on regularized, vide order dated February 8, 1999, with retrospective effect, i. e with effect from December 24, 1988. On regularization of her services, the petitioner claims that she was entitled to senior pay scales w. e. f. January 16, 1993, and selection grade w. e. f. January 16, 1998, in view of the circular issued by the State government on February 10, 1992.

(3.) IN similar circumstances, one Dr. (Smt.)Seema Raizada, claiming an identical relief had approached the State Administrative Tribunal in o. A. No. 1763/2000, which was allowed by the Tribunal on February 26, 2001. Against the aforesaid decision of the Tribunal, the State government approached this Court, through a writ petition being w. P. No. 4863/2001, which was dismissed by a Division Bench of this court on August 10, 2005. The claim made by Dr. (Smt.) Seema raizada, as upheld by the Tribunal, was maintained by the Division bench. The present petitioner also approached through a w. P. No. 2795/2006 (S), claiming an identical relief. The writ petition filed by the petitioner was disposed of by this Court with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim made by her in the light of Dr. (Smt.)Seema Raizada's case (Supra ).