BANWARI LAL SHARMA v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Court: High Court of Madhya Pradesh
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 2024-02-05. BANWARI LAL SHARMA v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE th ON THE 5 OF FEBRUARY, 2024 WRIT PETITION No. 2473 of 2024 BETWEEN:- BANWARI LAL SHARMA S/O LATE SHRI MOOL CHAND SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE BAHANGI KHURD THANA UTILA GWALIOR DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH) ..... PETITIONER (BY SHRI SANJEEV GOYAL - ADVOCATE ) AND 1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SHIKSHA VIBHAG, VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH) 2. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, THR. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH) 3. THE STATE OF M. P. THR. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT D EPARTM EN T VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH) 4. MUKHYA KARYAPALAN ADHIKARI JILA PANCHAYAT GWALIOR, GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH) 5. VIKAS KHAND ADHIKARI MURAR, GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH) ..... RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI K. S. TOMAR-GOVT.
ADVOCATE ) This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the following: ORDER Signature Not Verified Signed by: ABDUR RAHMAN Signing time: 05-Feb-24 7:15:32 PM The present petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the petitioner against the in-action on the part of the respondents in not giving the sixth pay commission to the petitioner from 1. 1. 2006. 2 . Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in respect of the grievance of the petitioner, he has preferred a series of representation from Annexure P/3 to P/7 but but the same have not been considered till date by the respondents. A limited prayer has been made by counsel for the petitioner that if the respondents/authorities are directed to decide the pending representation in accordance with law in a time bound manner, his grievance would be redressed. 3.
Per contra, learned Additional Advocate General appearing on advance copy on behalf of respondents/State submits that if such directions are issued, he has no objection. 4. Looking to the limited prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner which is not opposed by the counsel for the respondents/State, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent/Competent Authority to decide the representation of the petitioner (Annexure P/3) by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order in accordance with law. However, it is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case. 5. With the aforesaid directions, the petition is disposed off. E-copy/certified copy as per rules. (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) JUDGE ar Signature Not Verified Signed by: ABDUR RAHMAN Signing time: 05-Feb-24 7:15:32 PM Signature Not Verified Signed by: ABDUR RAHMAN Signing time: 05-Feb-24 7:15:32 PM
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.