Madhya Pradesh High Court: A single bench comprising of Vivek Rusia*, J., imposed cost of Rs. 50,000/- on the respondent authorities for harassment of retired employees, senior citizens and burdening the High Court with the cases which would not have been filed, if the Government had found the ACRs earlier which was only made available on directed for personal appearance of the CMHO.
In the instant matter, vide order dated 25-03-2017, the petitioner’s representation for grant of higher pay-scale w.e.f. 01-01-1994 has been rejected because the same was kept on hold due to non-availability of ACRs. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the petitioner preferred the present petition before this Court, challenging the same.
The Court observed that the Court vide order dated 15-06-2023 directed for personal appearance of the CMHO then only the respondent appeared before the Court, moreover, it took almost 10 years for the respondents to search the ACRs of the petitioner.
The Court observed that the “ACRs which have been found in this month, could have been found in the year 2017 or prior to it, but the respondents/Government compelled the petitioner to approach this Court twice.”
While imposing cost of Rs. 50,000/- on the State Government payable to the petitioner, the Court held that the Government’s approach in the present case is deprecated and the same not only led to the harassment of the retired employees, senior citizens but also burdening the High Court with the filing of these types of cases.
The Court allowed the present petition and directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of higher payscale and complete the whole exercise within a period of 30 days from today.
[Naresh Sinha v. State of M.P., 2023 SCC OnLine MP 2063, order dated 13-07-2023]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Abhinav Dhanodkar, Counsel for the Petitioner;
Mr. Tarun Kushwah, Learned Govt. Advocate, Counsel for the Respondent No/State.
