(BY SHRI DEVESH SHARMA- ADVOCATE) AND 1. 2. 3. 4 v. Ashwini Ray reported in 2017 (Vol & Ors.

(BY SHRI DEVESH SHARMA- ADVOCATE) AND

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH) IN CHIEF PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEER D EPARTM EN T 27-28 FIRST FLORE NIRMAN BHAWAN ARERA HILLS BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH) CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT NORTH ZONES THATIPUR, GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH) SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS (MADHYA DEPARTMENT, PRADESH) MANDAL GUNA EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH) ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS (BY SHRI VISHAL TRIPATHI- GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) .....RESPONDENTS This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the following: Signature Not Verified Signed by: VISHAL UPADHYAY Signing time: 06-10-2023 06:39:17 PM 2 ORDER

The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prays for the following relief:- to give ( i ) That a direction may kindly be given to the the service benefit and respondents minimum pay scale of the post of the permanent the date of his classified Labour classification petitioner. And pay the arrears of salary on fixation of pay along with all consequence benefits with interest from the date of his Classification. as permanent employee (ii) That, the respondents may further be directed to treat the petitioner at par with their similarly placed consequential benefits on the post of Plumber from the date of his classification. co-employees with seniority (iii) That, any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be given to the petitioner along with costs. Petitioner who happens to be a Labour submit that despite having been classified as a permanent employee, no benefit of regular pay scale has been extended to him. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that identical petitions have already been disposed of by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 5.9.2018 passed in W.P. No.20650/2018, relevant portion whereof reads as under: "The law in regard to the benefits flowing from an order of classification is now settled in view of the decision of Apex Court in the case of Ram Naresh Rawat Vs. Ashwini Ray reported in 2017 (Vol 3) SCC 436, relevant extract of which is reproduced below for convenience and ready reference: Signature Not Verified Signed by: VISHAL UPADHYAY Signing time: 06-10-2023 06:39:17 PM 3

4........The precise submission is that once they are conferred the status of permanent employee by the court and it is also categorically held that they are entitled to regular pay attached to the said post, not only the pay should be fixed in the regular pay- scale, the petitioners would also be entitled to the increments and other emoluments attached to the said post.

Insofar as petitioners before us are concerned they have been classified as 'permanent'. For this reason, we advert to the core issue, which would determine the fate of these cases, viz., whether these employees can be 'regular' employees in view of the aforesaid classification? In other words, with their classification as 'permanent', do they stand regularized in service? treated as

From the aforesaid, it follows that though a 'permanent employee' has right to receive pay in the graded pay-scale, at the same time, he would be getting only minimum of the said pay-scale with no increments. It is only the regularization in service which would entail grant of increments etc. in the pay scale. raised by

In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any substance the contentions petitioners in these contempt petitions. We are conscious of the fact that in some cases, on earlier occasions, the State Government while fixing the pay scale, granted increments as well. However, if some persons are given the benefit wrongly, that cannot form the basis of claiming the same relief. It is trite that right to equality under Article 14 is not Indian Council of (See v. T.K. Agricultural Research & Anr. Suryanarayan & Ors.9 ). negative terms