Sanchayita Lahkar

The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed a writ appeal filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh, declining to condone a delay of 711 days and stating that the issue had attained finality in earlier litigation. The Division Bench of Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Gajendra Singh recorded, “We are not inclined to condone the delay and entertain this writ appeal on merit.” The Court further recorded that the appeal had been filed despite the fact that similarly placed employees had already received relief through earlier writ petitions and appeals. The Court directed that “the Writ Appeal stands dismissed with a cost of Rs. 20,000/- which shall be deposited with the High Court Legal Aid Services Authority, Indore.”

The Court ordered that the cost amount be recovered from the Chief Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Bhopal, who had given the opinion to file the appeal. The Court recorded, “The cost shall be recovered from the Chief Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Bhopal, who gave an opinion to file the writ appeal without examining the facts and law involved in this case.”

Also Read: Omission To Name Some Accused In FIR Is a Relevant Fact Under Section 11 Evidence Act: Supreme Court

The appeal was filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh and others, challenging the order dated November 29, 2022, in Writ Petition No. 26705 of 2022, which had quashed the recovery of Rs. 94,056 from the retiral dues of the respondent. The Court recorded, “The issue in respect of the grant of benefit of higher pay scale and recovery had been put to rest way back in the year 2017–18.” The Court further stated, “In cases of similarly placed employees, the order passed by this Court in the writ petition had attained finality long back, which was not challenged by the State by way of SLP.”

The respondent was appointed as a Skilled Worker in 1987 in the Work Charged & Contingency Paid Establishment. In 2008, the Departmental Promotion Committee recommended his name for a higher pay scale, which was granted. In 2015, the Director, Treasury & Accounts raised an objection that the higher pay scale was wrongly granted, leading to an order of recovery dated November 3, 2015. The respondent retired from service on January 16, 2017, and Rs. 94,056 was deducted from his retiral dues.

The respondent did not challenge the recovery order immediately. However, other similarly placed employees filed Writ Petition No. 8741 of 2015 and related petitions, which were allowed by an order dated August 31, 2017. The Court stated, “The petitioners therein were rightly granted the benefit of a higher pay scale in light of the executive instruction dated 31.03.1984 after completion of five & ten years of service.” The State Government’s writ appeals against these orders were dismissed by a common order dated September 27, 2018.

The respondent subsequently filed Writ Petition No. 26705 of 2022, relying on these decisions. The Writ Court allowed the petition, quashing the recovery order, and stated, “Since the entitlement of the petitioner is not in dispute, hence, the State has no ground in writ appeal to challenge the impugned order by way of appeal.” The State then filed the present appeal despite earlier cases on the same issue having reached finality.

The Court recorded, “With the consent of the Government Advocate appearing for the State, the writ petition was allowed on the very first date of hearing.” The Court further recorded that at that time, “the Government Advocate did not seek any time to file a reply to the writ petition.”

Referring to legal precedents, the Court stated, “The recovery of Rs. 94,056 at the time of retirement could not have been made in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab & Others v. Rafiq Masih (White Washer), reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334, as well as the judgment delivered by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others v. Jagdish Prasad Singh (Writ Appeal No. 815 of 2017).”

The Court directed an inquiry into the filing of the appeal, stating, “On 17.02.2025, we directed the Government Advocate to call the OIC along with a note-sheet as to who gave the permission / opinion / approval for filing this writ appeal before the Division Bench.” It recorded, “We are shocked and surprised that neither the office of the Advocate General nor the Law Department granted any approval for filing this writ appeal.”

The Court noted that despite the absence of approval, “the Chief Engineer, PHE, Bhopal vide order dated 16.12.2024 appointed the OIC and directed him to file this writ appeal.” The Court further recorded, “No reasons have been assigned as to why the Chief Engineer thought that this matter is fit for filing a writ appeal before this Court.”

The Principal Secretary, Public Health Engineering, appeared before the Court via video conferencing. The Court recorded his submission that “the matter is being placed before the Cabinet for approval for the creation of supernumerary posts and only benefits of upgradation can be given to the writ petitioner.” The Court stated, “This explanation is further shocking to us that in respect of the refund of Rs. 94,056 to Class - IV employees, the Government is going to place this matter before the Cabinet.”

The Court recorded that “We have come across various cases, in which Class – IV employees of the various departments of the State of Madhya Pradesh are affected by the decision taken by the superior officers.” The Court further stated, “Most of the cases are of the nature of withdrawal of the pay scale upgradation, recovery at the time of retirement, and non-grant of similar benefits to remaining employees and delay in promotion etc.”

The Court dismissed the appeal and recorded, “In view of the above, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed with a cost of Rs. 20,000/- which shall be deposited with the High Court Legal Aid Services Authority, Indore.” It directed, “The cost shall be recovered from the Chief Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Bhopal, who gave an opinion to file the writ appeal without examining the facts and law involved in this case.”

Also Read: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Sexual Offense Case, Directs Accused to Marry Victim Within Three Months

The Court further directed, “A copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretary of the Government of Madhya Pradesh for compliance and necessary action.” The Court recorded, “We hope and trust that he will look into it seriously and report the outcome before this Court.”

Advocates Representing the Parties

For the Appellants / State: Shri Anand Soni, Additional Advocate General

For the Respondent / Writ Petitioner: None appeared

Case Title: The State of Madhya Pradesh Through Public Health Engineering & Others v. Balwant Singh Mandloi
Neutral Citation: 2025:MPHC-IND:5125
Case Number: W.A. No. 404 of 2025
Bench: Justice Vivek Rusia, Justice Gajendra Singh

[Read/Download order]