HC favours petitioner in Kramonnati case
| Date :10-Sep-2019 |
Legal Correspondent :
A single bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court comprising Justice, Nandita Dubey has issued directions on the petition filed by Mangal Dubey that “It is directed that, the entry made in the service book shall not come in way of granting the benefit of Kramonnati to the petitioner, and if the petitioner is otherwise found entitled for the benefit of Kramonnati, the benefit be extended to her positively before her retirement dated on September 30, 2019.
The petitioner should be granted the benefit as she would not have refused the promotion.” This petition filed by the petitioner seeking the following relief that omit the adverse entry dated on June 24, 2019 made by the respondents in the service book of the petitioner regarding benefits of Kramonnati as such is mentioned at serial no.792 in service book of the petitioner since December 12, 2014. She has refused to accept the promotion, she is not, therefore, entitled to Kramonnati.
Extend benefits of Kramonnati to the petitioner, grant any other relief which this court deems fit and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of the case. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that, in the year 2014, due to some unavoidable circumstances, the petitioner refused to accept the promotion. Consequently, the respondents refused to extend the benefit of Kramonnati to her and made entry dated on June 24, 2019 as no.792 in this regard in her service book. It is submitted that, petitioner will be retiring on September 30, 2019. The benefit has not been extended by the Authority merely because the petitioner has refused to accept the promotion.
He further submitted that, in number of cases, this court has decided this issue that merely because promotion is refused, the benefit cannot be withdrawn. He has also relied an order dated on October 17, 2018 issued by the Deputy Secretary, Finance Department, Government of MP, Bhopal whereby the State Government has clarified the situation in this regard and observed that just because promotion has been refused, the Kramonnati/Samayman Vetanman granted earlier could not be withdrawn/taken back. Counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance on the order dated on November 2, 2018 passed in writ petition (Gouri Shankar Pandey and others vs. The State of MP and others) wherein a coordinate bench of this chas set aside the impugned order and has allowed the writ petition in the light of the order passed by this court in writ petition decided on September 6, 2013. Panel Lawyer has conceded that the matter is covered by the aforesaid decisions of this Court.