This document contains the minutes of the 26th meeting of the Advisory Committee, Madhya Pradesh, which was held by circulation. The meeting considered representations from State Government employees regarding their allocation following the bifurcation of the state, in compliance with court directions and other representations. Several departments, including Public Health and Family Welfare, Ayush, and Home, had their cases repeatedly deferred due to incomplete information. The committee emphasized the need for comprehensive proposals and timely submission of details. The document also details various individual cases, recommendations for revision of allocation, and decisions on representations, often referencing court orders and existing guidelines. Key issues discussed include doctor retention due to shortages, the process for handling representations from employees, and specific cases of allocation adjustments based on personal circumstances, seniority, and policy adherence.
SOURCE PDF LINK :
Click to access 26meetingminutes.pdf
Click to view full document content
By Speed Post
F. No. 14/3/2006-SR(S)-Vol.-VI
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances \& Pensions
(Department of Personnel \& Training)
3 $3^{\text {rd }}$ Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi-110003,
Dated: $9^{\text {th }}$ October, 2015
To
The Principal Secretary, Department of General Administration, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004 (M.P.).
The Secretary,
Department of General Administration, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur-492002 (Chhattisgarh).
Subject: -Minutes of $26^{\text {th }}$ meeting of the Advisory Committee, M.P.
Sir,
I am directed to forward herewith the minutes of $26^{\text {th }}$ meeting of the Advisory Committee, M.P. held by circulation to consider the representations of State Government employees in compliance of Court’s directions and other representations received direct from the employees of erstwhile state of M.P.
2. Kindly acknowledge the receipt of the minutes. The orders for acceptance/ rejection of representations would be issued separately by the Central Govt.
Encls.: As above
Yours faithfully,
Director (SR)
$011-24623711$
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Public Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Public Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Ayush, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Health \& Ayush, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Public Works, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Public Works, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue (Land Records), Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue (Land Records), Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of SC \& ST Welfare, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Tribal Welfare, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Public Health Engineering, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Public Health Engineering, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Horticulture, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Horticulture, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Farmers’ Welfare and Agriculture Development, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Commercial Tax, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Commercial Tax, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry (Veterinary), Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry (Veterinary), Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Women and Child Development, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Women and Child Development, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Commerce and Industry, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Commerce and Industry, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Technical Education, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of Technical Education, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of School Education, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal-462004.
- The Principal Secretary, Department of School Education, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002.
Minutes of $26^{\text {th }}$ meeting of Advisory Committee, M.P.
$26^{\text {th }}$ meeting of Advisory Committee, M.P. was held by circulation of agenda to the following:-
i. Ms. Archana Varma, Joint Secretary (AV), – Chairperson.
DoPT, Government of India
ii. Shri K. Suresh, Principal Secretary, -Member
D/o General Administration,
Government of M.P.
iii. Shri D.D. Singh, Special Secretary -Member
D/o General Administration,
Government of Chhattisgarh
iv. Ms. K. Kipgen, Director (SR), DoPT, – Member.
Government of India
2. The Committee noted that the bifurcation of the States took place 14 years ago and in this regard the Committee in its last meeting advised both the State Governments viz. M.P. and Chhattisgarh to draw a deadline for consideration of new representations. However, no such proposal has been received so far for consideration of the Committee. The Committee impresses upon the same and reiterates that a comprehensive proposal should be prepared taking into account its implications/ramifications by the Department of General Administration, M.P. (being nodal Department for SR related work) in consultation with DOPT, Govt. of India and Department of General Administration, Chhattisgarh. It should be placed before the Committee in its next meeting.
3. The Committee noticed that the cases of Department of Public Health and Family Welfare, Department of Ayush and Department of Home are being repeatedly deferred for want of complete or specific information. The Committee took a serious view of it and has observed following:
(i) Department of Public Health and Family Welfare
Administrative Departments submitted that the appeals were required to be preferred before the Hon’ble High Court in the cases wherein the Court had quashed the allocation order in respect of the petitioners. However, the Committee observed that the same has not yet been preferred even after a lapse of 3-4 years. Taking a serious note of it the Committee desired that all such cases should be re-examined by both the State Governments of M.P. and Chhattisgarh after obtaining legal opinion from the Department of Law, Govt. of M.P./Chhattisgarh with their mutual consent so that an amicable decision
could be arrived at and pending litigations can be disposed of/reduced. Department of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of Chhattisgarh has conveyed its consent on retaining of doctors/ employees due for retirement on superannuation within 2 years. The Committee noted that Directorate of Health, M.P. is also of view that representations of doctors may be considered keeping in view the shortage of doctors in M.P. and their retirement on superannuation on attaining the age of 65 years.
The Committee further noted that a proposal in this regard is yet to be submitted by the Department of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of M.P. In view of the above, the Committee desires that this aspect may be comprehensively examined keeping in view its implications/ramifications, if any, and a concrete proposal should be formulated/submitted by the Department of General Administration, Govt. of M.P. in consultation with Department of General Administration, Govt. of Chhattisgarh and Govt. of India defining specific terms, conditions and modalities of such retention as an exception, only where the Court directed so and Department of Law of State Govt. advised not to go for appeal. This would avoid further litigation and adverse Court’s orders/Contempt.
(ii) Department of AYUSH
The Department of Ayush has conveyed that due to shortage of Ayurvedic Medical Officers (AMOs) in M.P., they are not in a position to relieve these 11 AMOs. In the meantime 7 AMOs stood retired on superannuation and the remaining 4 AMOs will be retiring within the next 2-3 years. The Committee noted that vide letter dated 09.02.2015 Department of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of Chhattisgarh has conveyed its consent on retention of doctors/employees going to retire within 2 years and had not joined the State even after expiry of 14 years from their allocation to Chhattisgarh because their representations/Court Cases are pending. Department of Ayush, Govt. of M.P. has also conveyed its consent on retention of such AMOs in M.P.
In view of the above, the Committee desires that this aspect may be comprehensively examined keeping in view its implications/ramifications, if any, and a concrete proposal should be formulated/submitted by the Department of General Administration, Govt. of M.P. in consultation with Department of General Administration, Govt. of Chhattisgarh and Govt. of India defining specific terms, conditions and modalities of such retention as a one-time measure.
(iii) Department of Home
The Committee noted that some of the cases are being repeatedly deferred for want of complete information/comments. The Committee took serious note of it and expressed its displeasure. The Committee desires that GAD, M.P. should compile/seek the comments from the Department of Home and send to the DOPT, Govt. of India for expediting the disposal of the cases to avoid repeated deferment of the cases.
- In addition, the Committee impressed upon for following:
(i) Complete details of Writ Petitions/Appeals, etc. and updated status of all court cases (CA filed/Not filed/Disposed, etc.) pending in the various High Courts with facts/comments on issues/grievances raised/involved shall be furnished by the concerned Departments within one month from the date of circulation of the minutes to Shri R.N. Chauhan, the Nodal Officer, GAD, M.P. as well as to the Central Government.
(ii) Concerned Departments may be directed to appoint Officer-in-charge to make all the relevant records readily available and monitor all the pending Court Cases and instruct the State Governments Counsels handling these cases to get all the pending cases duly mentioned/represented before the Courts and take necessary steps for expediting their disposal. - It has also been observed that during last 2-3 meetings of the Advisory Committee, the concerned Departments could provide details of only about half of the cases mentioned in the agenda items. This lethargic attitude has also been seriously viewed by the Committee and directed that a time frame must be fixed for providing the details so as to enable the Committee to consider all pending requests/representations and holistic/logical view could be taken on them.
- As regards representations for revision of State allocation, the Committee considered 77 cases in total. Details are given below:
| Total No. of cases |
No. of cases consid ered | No. of cases recommended for acceptance | No. of cases recommend ed for rejection | No. of cases recommendations | No. of cases deferred | No. of cases deferred for want of comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 83 | 77 | 35 | 13 | 8 | 21 | 6 |
| Agenda Item Nos. – $8,9,13,15,16,17$, $18,21,23,28,30,31$, $33,35,37,38,46,47$, 52 to 58,64 to 68,72 , $74,75,76 \& 81$. |
Agenda Item Nos.- $19,26,27$, 39 to 43 , $62,73,77$, $79 \& 82$ |
Agenda Item Nos.- $2,20,22$, $24,36,49$, $50 \& 78$. |
Agenda Item Nos.- 1, 3 to $7,10,11,12$, $14,25,32,34$, $44,59,60,61$, $69,70,80 \&$ 83. |
Agenda Item Nos.- 29, $45,48,51$, $63 \& 71$ |
- Recommendations of the Committee in each individual case are reflected in the following table:
| Sr. No. | Agen da item No. | Name, Designation, Department and W.P./W.A. No. | Recommendations of the Advisory Committee |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | 1 | Dr. Ramesh Kumar Neema, Medical Specialist, D/o Public Health & Family Welfare (W.P. No. 1836/2007) | In compliance of directions dated 30.11.2011 passed in W.P. No. 1836/2007 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of M.P., Dr. Neema submitted a representation for revision of his allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. of wherein he has raised following grounds: |
(i) 65 Medical Specialist (names mentioned in the representation) junior to him were in the pay scale of Rs. 12000-16500 but were allocated to M.P. in the pay scale of Rs. 10000-15200
(ii) Dr. Ram Chandra Sharma and 23 others (names mentioned in the representation) Specialist doctors junior to him were in the pay scale of Rs. 12000-16500 but were allocated to M.P.
Administrative Department did not clarify retention of doctors junior to Dr. Neema in M.P. and grant of ACP to above juniors with retrospective effect prior to/on 23.09.2000, notwithstanding the fact that orders to this effect were issued after publication of TFAL and they were allocated to M.P. in lower pay scale.
The Administrative Department further informed that DOB of Dr. Neema is 07.09.1954. He is due for retirement on 30.09.2019 on superannuation on attaining the age of 65 years. Administrative Department further opined that in view of shortage of specialist doctors in M.P. appropriate decision may be taken in compliance of Court’s directions.
The Committee noted that Dr. Neema has attained the age of 61 years but age of retirement for doctors is 65 years.
Since the matter is being repeatedly deferred and specific comments by Administrative Departments have not been forthcoming, the Committee viewed that.
| 3. | 3 | Dr. Pramod Kumar Dube, Medical Officer, D/o Public Health \& Family Welfare (W.P. No. 2398/2007) |
|---|---|---|
| 4. | 4 | Dr. Ashok Kumar Dixit, Medical Specialist, D/o Public Health \& Family Welfare (W.P. No. 4996/2006) |
| 5. | 5 | Dr. Krishna Kumar Bhargav, Child Specialist, D/o Public Health \& Family Welfare (W.P. No. 1086/2005) |
| 6. | 7 | Dr. R. P. Srivastava, Medical specialist, D/o Public Health \& Family Welfare W.P. No. 4367/2007 |
The Administrative Department informed that legal opinion for filing appeals has been sought from the State Govt. Counsel which is yet to be received.
The Committee noted that this may be vigorously pursued and it may be kept apprised of the present status as well as subsequent development.
The Administrative Department further informed that all these doctors have already attained the age of 60 years or about to attain the age of 60 years. However they will retire on superannuation on attaining the age of 65 years. Administrative Department further opined that appropriate decision in compliance of Court’s direction in the light shortage of specialist doctors in M.P. may be taken.
Since the matter is being repeatedly deferred and appeals have not yet been preferred by the State Govt., the Committee viewed that both the State Governments should arrive at a practical solution/decision which does not set bad precedent/adverse implications/ramifications. The Committee noted that Department of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of Chhattisgarh has conveyed its consent on retaining of doctors/ employees due for retirement on superannuation within 2 years. The Committee also noted that Directorate of Health, M.P. is of view to take appropriate decision in compliance of Court’s directions in the light of shortage of specialist doctors in M.P.
The Committee further noted that specific proposal for retention of those doctors who already have attained the age of 60 years is yet to be received from the Department of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of M.P.
In view of the above, the Committee desires that the views of the Department of Health, M.P. for taking appropriate decision regarding compliance of Court’s directions the light of shortage of Specialist doctors in M.P. may be comprehensively examined
| 7. | 6 | Shri Bhaiyaram Bhagat, MPW (M) D/o Public Health & Family Welfare W. P. No. 4043/2005 | keeping in view its implications/ramifications, if any, and a concrete proposal should be formulated/submitted by the Department of General Administration, Govt. of M.P. in consultation with Department of General Administration, Govt. of Chhattisgarh and Govt. of India defining specific terms, conditions and modalities of such retention as an exception, only where the Court directed so and Department of Law of State Govt. advised not to go for appeal. This would avoid further litigation and adverse Court’s orders/Contempt. |
| 8. | 8 | Dr. Kailash Chandra Mahajan, AMO, D/o AYUSH W. P. No. 6775/2006 | As seen from the website of the Hon’ble High Court, the writ petition appears to be disposed of on 26.09.2005. However, order of the Hon’ble Court is not available on the website. The Committee observed that the petitioner appears to be a non-state cadre employee. However, in the absence of order dated 26.09.2005 and comments of the Administrative Department, no decision could be arrived at. The Committee desired that a copy of the order dated 26.09.2005 be obtained from the Hon’ble Court by the Administrative Department and furnished to DOPT alongwith representation of the petitioner and comments thereon. The Committee deferred the matter for its next meeting. |
| 9. | 9 | Dr. Kunwar Pal Singh, AMO, D/o AYUSH W. P. No. 6774/2006 | The Administrative Department confirmed that Dr. Mahajan retired on 31.01.2015 and Dr. Singh retired on 31.03.2015 on superannuation. In the light of the above confirmation/facts, the Committee recommended that necessary action would be taken in accordance with guidelines dated 11.08.2008 with regard to dead/retired employee issued by the Central Government. |
| 10. | 10 | Dr. Rajesh Joshi, AMO, D/o AYUSH W. P. No. 3065/2006 | The Department of Ayush informed date of retirement as under: Dr. Rajesh Joshi – 30.06.2019 Dr. Vishambhar Dayal Chaturvedi- 30.06.2016 Dr. Devendra Pratap Singh Sengar – 30.08.2016 Dr. Vishnu Dutt Mishra – 30.06.2016 |
| 11. | 11. | Dr. Vishambhar Dayal Chaturvedi, AMO, D/o AYUSH W. P. No. 3905/2007 |
| 12. | 12. | Dr. Devendra Pratap Singh Sengar, AMO, D/o AYUSH W. P. No. 3793/2008 | The Committee noted that the Department of Ayush is of view to retain these Ayurvedic Medical Officers (AMOs) who have not joined the State of Chhattisgarh in compliance of Court’s order and still working in the State of M.P. Due to shortage of AMOs in M.P., they are proposed to have been retained in M.P. Since the matter is being repeatedly deferred and specific comments by Administrative Departments have not been forthcoming, the Committee viewed that both the State Governments should arrive at practical solution/decision which does not set bad precedent/adverse implications/ramifications. The Committee noted Department of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of Chhattisgarh has conveyed its consent on retaining of doctors/ employees due for retirement on superannuation within 2 years. In view of the above, the Committee desires that this aspect may be comprehensively examined keeping in view its implications/ramifications, if any, and a concrete proposal should be formulated/submitted by the Department of General Administration, Govt. of M.P. in consultation with Department of General Administration, Govt. of Chhattisgarh and Govt. of India defining specific terms, conditions and modalities of such retention as a one-time measure. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 14. | 16 | Dr. Awadh Bihari Sharma, AMO, D/o AYUSH, WA No. 134/2011 | The Administrative Department confirmed all these Ayurvedic Medical Officers retired on superannuation on the dates mentioned against their names as under: Dr. Awadh Bihari Sharma -30.06.2015 Dr. K Meda Nath Mishra -28.02.2015 Dr. Mehtab Singh Kaurav -31.12.2011 Dr. Krishan Kumar Saraiya -31.08.2013 |
| 15. | 13 | Dr. Kedar Nath Mishra, AMO, D/o AYUSH W. P. No. 1037/2006 | |
| 16. | 15 | Dr. Mehtab Singh Kaurav, AMO, D/o AYUSH, WA No. 253/2011 | Dr. Aditya Narayan Bajpayee -31.05.2015 In the light of above confirmation/facts, the Committee recommended that necessary action would be taken in accordance with guidelines dated 11.08.2008 with regard to dead/retired employee issued by the Central Government. |
| 17. | 17 | Dr. Krishan Kumar Saraiya, AMO, D/o AYUSH, WP No. 4244/2008 | |
| 18. | 18 | Dr. Aditya Narayan Bajpayee, AMO, D/o AYUSH, WP No. 5390/2005 |
| 19. | 19 | Shri Bijendra Kumar Sharma, Sub-Engineer, D/o Public Works, W. P. No. 1496/2005 |
In compliance of directions dated 19.06.2013 of Hon’ble High Court of M.P., Bench at Gwalior, the representation of Shri Sharma was considered by the Committee. Shri Sharma has contended that his junior viz. Shri Manoj Jain was allocated to M.P. and his wife Smt. Vijay Lata Sharma is working as Shiksha Karmi Varg-I in Government Higher Secondary School, Bhonti, Shivpuri, M.P. The Administrative Department informed that his wife viz. Smt. Vijay Lata Sharma is working as ‘Sanvida Karmi’. She is not a permanent Government employee. With regard to allocation of his junior Shri Manoj Jain to M.P., they informed that Shri Jain was tentatively allocated to Chhattisgarh. Later on, he had submitted a representation for revision of his allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. against his Tentative Final Allocation. The then Advisory Committee recommended allocation Shri Manoj Jain to M.P. on the basis of total blindness of his father under medical hardship category. In the light of above facts, the Committee recommended rejection of representation of Shri Sharma. A speaking order shall be issued accordingly. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20. | 20 | Shri Anand Kumar Mishra, Sub-Engineer, D/o Public Works, W. P. No. 1489/2005 | This case has been deferred since $23^{\text {rd }}$ meeting of the Committee i.e. 20.09 .2013 for want of information from the concerned Department. Earlier, the Administrative Department had submitted that appeal is being preferred challenging the order dated 15.12.2010 of Hon’ble High Court of M.P. whereby allocation order was quashed. Now, the Administrative Department has informed that the appeal has been preferred before the Hon’ble Court challenging the above order of Hon’ble Court which is still pending. In the light of above position, the Committee recommended dropping this from the agenda and opined that the matter would be taken up in due course of time based on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court subject to outcome of the appeal. |
| 21. | 21 | Shri Rajveer Singh Bhadoriya, Sub-Engineer, D/o Public Works, (W. P. No. 396/2006) | The Administrative department of the petitioner informed that Shri Bhadoriya died of heart attack on 19.01.2015. In the light of above, the Committee recommended that necessary action may be taken in accordance with guidelines dated 11.08.2008 with regard to dead/retired employee issued by the Central Government. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 22. | 22 | Shri Umesh Varma, Constable, D/o Home (Representation) | The Administrative Department of Shri Varma informed that he is a Non-State Cadre employee. Non-State Cadre employees stood allocated to the State where they were working as on the appointed day i.e. 01.11.2000. The Committee noted that no separate orders for allocation of Non-State cadre employee were issued. Therefore, consideration of allocation of Non-State Cadre employee does not fall within the purview of Advisory Committee. As such, the Committee did not consider his representation and the same was dropped from the agenda. |
| 23. | 23 | Shri Gehru Singh Dhurve, Constable, D/o Home (Representation) | The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Dhurve belongs to ST category, is domicile/optee of Madhya Pradesh and is employees of State cadre. In the light of the above confirmation/facts, the Committee considered his representation and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Dhurve from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised guidelines dated 24.06.2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to ST category and is domicile/optee of M.P. |
| 24. | 24 | Shri Gulab Singh Gahlot, Head Constable, D/o Home (Representation) | The Administrative Department of Shri Gahlot informed that he is a Non-State Cadre employee. Non-State Cadre employees stood allocated to the State where they were working as on the appointed day i.e. 01.11.2000. The Committee noted that no separate orders for allocation of Non-State cadre employee were issued. Therefore, consideration of allocation of Non-State Cadre employee does not fall within the purview of Advisory Committee. As such, the Committee did not consider his representation and the same was dropped from the agenda. |
| 25. | 25 | Shri Jitendra Singh Chauhan, Company Commander, D/o Home, WA No. 400/2011 | While disposing of the Writ Appeal on 07.03.2014, the Hon’ble High Court of MP, bench at Gwalior directed the Central Government to reconsider the representation made earlier by the petitioner, pass speaking order and communicate the same to the petitioner within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of order. |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Committee noted that the Administrative Department has only placed the representation of Shri Chauhan before it. It has not furnished comments on the grounds raised by Shri Chauhan in his representation. In absence of the comments of Administrative Department, the Committee did not consider the representation and directed the Administrative Department to furnish their comments to the Central Government. | |||
| In the light of above, the Committee deferred the matter for its next meeting. | |||
| 26. | 26 | Shri Brij Kishor Dharvan, Head Constable (Radio), D/o Home (Representation) | They have submitted their representations for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to Madhya Pradesh stating that they had opted for the State of M.P. but were allocated to Chhattisgarh against their option. Their seniority was not fixed as per existing rules of State Government. Therefore, they became junior and accordingly allocated to Chhattisgarh on juniority basis. They are facing financial, mental and family related problems. |
| 27 | Shri Aditya Kumar Sharma, Constable (Radio), D/o Home (Representation) | The Administrative Department informed that Shri Dharvan and Shri Sharma were allocated to Chhattisgarh on juniority basis (A-4 category) in ‘Kramonnat’ pay scale. | |
| The Committee observed that family circumstances and financial problems are not covered by the guidelines of allocation. The Committee further observed that they were allocated to Chhattisgarh in accordance with extant rules/guidelines for allocation as clarified by the Administrative Department. | |||
| In the light of above, the Committee recommended rejection of representations of Shri Dharvan and Shri Sharma. |
| 28. | 28 | Shri Braham Dev Pachauri, Head Constable (Radio Operator), D/o Home W.P. No. 437/2007 |
The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Pachauri retired on 31.01.2013 on superannuation. In the light of above facts, the Committee recommended that necessary action would be taken in accordance with guidelines dated 11.08.2008 with regard to dead/retired employee issued by the Central Government. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 29. | 29 | Shri Shivendra Upadhyay, Constable, D/o Home, W.P. No. 1423/2009 | As seen from the website of Hon’ble High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur, the writ petition filed by the petition appears to have been disposed of on 11.02.2013 with disposal remarks “infructuous”. The Committee observed that the petitioner had filed the above petition challenging nonconsideration of his application for mutual transfer with Shri Rajesh Muskole. The Committee further observed that the Administrative Department failed to furnish certified copy of order dated 11.02.2013 passed by the Court, representation of petitioner and comments thereon. The Committee noted that a certified copy of order dated 11.02.2013 may be obtained from the Hon’ble Court by the Administrative Department and furnished to Central Government alongwith representation and comments thereon for further examination. The Committee accordingly deferred the matter for its next meeting. |
| 30. | 30 | Shri Munnalal Karade, A.S.I., D/o Home (Representation) |
The Administrative Department confirmed that they belong to SC category, are domicile/optee of Madhya Pradesh and are employees of State cadre. |
| 31. | 31 | Shri Balram Singh Baghel, S.I. (Radio), D/o Home (Representation) | In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered their representations and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Karade, Shri Bhaghel and Shri Ahirwar from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised guidelines dated 24.06 .2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as they belong to SC category and are domicile/optee of M.P. |
| 32. | 33 | Shri Inder Lal Ahirwar, Subedar, D/o Home, (Representation) | Shri Sharma has submitted a representation for revision of State allocation from Chhattisgarh to Madhya Pradesh. He had opted for M.P. but he was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option. He is |
| domicile of district Muraina, M.P. He has to look after his old aged and ill parents. His family is residing at Muraina M.P. He has to take care of his family. His wife is working as Shiksha Karmi in M.P. The Administrative Department has informed that Shri Sharma was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option for M.P. on juniority basis under general category in kramonnat pay scale. However, the Administrative Department did not confirm cadre, post, place of posting, date of appointment, etc. in respect of wife of Shri Sharma. Taking note of above, the Committee deferred the matter for its next meeting and instructed the Administrative Department to furnish the desired information to the Central Government. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| 34. | 34 | Shri Shivakant Constable (GD), D/o (Representation) |
Shri Tiwari has submitted a representation for revision of allocation form Chhattisgarh to M.P. He has mentioned in his representation that he is domicile of District Rewa, M.P. His wife is suffering from Epilepsy. Nobody is in his family to look after his old age parents. The Administrative Department has furnished their comments stating that there is vacancy for the post of Constable in M.P. Vi. Sa. Bal and has given consent on revision of allocation of Shri Tiwari to M.P. The Committee observed that the Administrative Department has not furnished the complete information viz. Cadre, option, Date of appointment, etc. supported by TFAL in respect of Shri Tiwari. Taking note of above, the Committee deferred the matter for its next meeting and instructed the Administrative Department to furnish the desired information to the Central Government. |
| 35. | 35 | Shri Rajeev Thakur, S.I. (Radio), D/o Home, (Representation) |
The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Thakur and Shri Kunjam belong to ST category, had opted for M.P. and are domicile of M.P. They are employees of state cadre. |
| 36. | 38 | Shri Shivaji Kunjam, Head Constable (Radio), D/o Home, (Representation) | In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered their representations and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Thakur and Shri Kunjam from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised guidelines dated 24.06.2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as they belong to ST category and are domicile/optee of M.P. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 37. | 36 | Shri Govind Singh Markam, Head Constable, D/o Home, (Representation) |
The Administrative Department of Shri Markam informed that he is a Non-State Cadre employee. Non-State Cadre employees stood allocated to the State where they were working as on the appointed day i.e. 01.11.2000. The Committee noted that no separate orders for allocation of Non-State cadre employee were issued. Therefore, consideration of allocation of Non-State Cadre employee does not fall within the purview of Advisory Committee. As such, the Committee did not consider his representations and the same were dropped from the agenda. |
| 38. | 37 | Shri Jawahar Lal Sisodia, S.I. (Executive), D/o Home, (Representation) | The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Sisodia belongs to SC category, is domicile/optee of Madhya Pradesh and is employees of State cadre. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered his representation and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Sisodia from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised guidelines dated 24.06.2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to SC category and is domicile/optee of M.P. |
| 39. | 39 | Shri Bachchan Singh, Constable, D/o Home, (Representation) | Shri Singh submitted a representation for revision of allocation form Chhattisgarh to M.P. He has mentioned in his representation that he had opted for M.P. but was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option. He is domicile of M.P. His wife is suffering from incurable kidney disease and is under treatment at Bhopal, M.P. He has to look after his old aged parents and seriously ill wife. He is facing difficulties in discharging his liabilities. The Administrative Department has informed that Shri Singh was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option for M.P. on juniority basis under general category in ‘gair Kramonnat’ pay scale. |
| In the light of above, the Committee noted that grounds raised by Shri Singh and mere option/domicile do not confer a right for his allocation to M.P. The grounds raised by him are not covered under the existing guidelines of allocation. Therefore, the Committee recommended rejection of his representation for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| 40. | 40 | Shri Devendra Prasad Rai, A.S.I., D/o Home, (Representation) |
Shri Rai submitted a representation for revision of allocation form Chhattisgarh to M.P. He has mentioned in his representation that he had opted for M.P. but was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option. He is domicile of M.P. and belongs to OBC category. His wife is suffering from heart disease and is under treatment at Birla Hospital, Ujjain, M.P. She had once suffered from heart attack. The Administrative Department has informed that Shri Rai was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option for M.P. on juniority basis under OBC category in ‘Kramaunnat’ pay scale. In the light of above, the Committee noted that grounds raised by Shri Rai and mere options/domicile do not confer a right for his allocation to M.P. The grounds raised by him are not covered under the existing guidelines of allocation. Therefore, the Committee recommended rejection of his representation for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. |
| 41. | 41 | Shri Azad Mohammad Qureshi, A.S.I., D/o Home (Representation) |
Shri Qureshi has submitted a representation for revision of allocation form Chhattisgarh to M.P. He has contended that he is domicile of M.P. He had fracture of femur neck and had undergone surgery and as such he is incapable to perform his duties which include travelling from his residence in Madhya Pradesh to Chhattisgarh. He is only male member to look after his family and his old aged ill mother. The Administrative Department has informed that Shri Qureshi was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option for M.P. on juniority basis in ‘gair kramonnat’ pay scale. |
| In the light of above, the Committee noted that the grounds are not covered under the existing guidelines of allocation. Therefore, the Committee recommended rejection of his representation for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 42. | 42 | Shri Hamir Singh, Constable, D/o Home, (Representation) |
Shri Singh has submitted a representation for revision of allocation form Chhattisgarh to M.P. He has mentioned in his representation that he had opted for M.P. but was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option. He is domicile of M.P. and his ancestral property and family is in Madhya Pradesh. He is unable to discharge his liability of family and his old age mother. The Administrative Department has informed that Shri Singh was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option for M.P. on juniority basis in OBC category. In the light of above, the Committee noted that family circumstances and mere options/ domicile do not confer a right for his allocation to M.P. The grounds raised by Shri Singh are not covered under the existing guidelines of allocation. Therefore, the Committee recommended rejection of his representation for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. |
| 43. | 43 | Shri Niranjan Vishwakarma, A.S.I. (Radio), D/o Home (Representation) |
Shri Vishwakarma has submitted a representation for revision of allocation form Chhattisgarh to M.P. He has mentioned in his representation that he had opted for M.P. but was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option. His wife had undergone open heart surgery on 27.10.2012 at Escort Heart Institute, Delhi. He is facing financial problem and is unable to discharge his social duties. His presence at his residence in M.P. is necessary to look after his family. The Administrative Department has informed that Shri Vishwakarma was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option for M.P. on juniority basis in ‘karamonnat’ pay scale. In the light of above, the Committee noted that the grounds raised by Shri Vishwakarma are not covered under the existing guidelines of allocation. |
| 44. | 44 | Shri Arun Kumar Tripathi, Head Constable (Radio Operator), D/o Home, W A No. 428/2012 |
Therefore, the Committee recommended rejection of his representation for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. |
| While passing the directions dated 15.12.2010 in W.P. No. 2010/2005, the Hon’ble High Court of M.P., Bench at Gwalior quashed the allocation order of the petitioner to the State of Chhattisgarh because the petitioner had been serving in the State of M.P. after his allocation to Chhattisgarh for last 10 years in pursuance to the Stay order. The Hon’ble Court further opined that it would not be just and proper to again refer the matter to the appropriate Government for deciding the representation of the petitioner. | |||
| This case was placed before the advisory Committee in its meeting held on 13.07.2012. The Committee recommended to file a writ appeal against the above said judgment dated 15.12.2010. Accordingly, the State Government preferred an appeal challenging the above order dated 15.12.2010. | |||
| The Administrative Department informed that writ appeal No. 428/2012 preferred by the State Government was dismissed by the Hon’ble Court on 25.07.2012 for being time barred. | |||
| The Committee desired that action taken report be submitted to the Central Government in the light of dismissal of writ appeal by the Hon’ble Court. GAD/Admin Department may also seek legal opinion and place the matter before the Central Government, for further course of action. | |||
| 45. | 45 | Shri Shivcharan Singh Parihar, Subedar, D/o Home W P. No. 12957/2010 | While disposing of W.P. No. 12957/2010 on 09.12.2014, the Hon’ble Court granted liberty to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to Respondent No. 7 (Union of India). The Hon’ble Court directed Union of India to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order, by passing a speaking order. |
| The Committee observed that the Administrative Department failed to furnish a copy |
| 46. | 46 | Shri Lokram Kakoriya, Constable, D/o Home (Representation) | The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Kakoria belongs to ST category, is domicile/optee of Madhya Pradesh and is employees of State cadre. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered his representation and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Kakoria from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised guidelines dated 24.06.2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to ST category and is domicile/optee of M.P. |
| 47. | 47 | Shri Santosh Kumar Purniya, Constable, D/o Home, (Representation) | The Administrative Department has confirmed that Shri Purnia belongs to SC category, had opted for M.P. and is domicile of Hoshangabad, M.P. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered his representation and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Purniya from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised guidelines dated 24.06.2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to SC category and is domicile/optee of M.P. |
| 48. | 48 | Shri Mazhar Khan, Head Constable, D/o Home, (Representation) | Shri Khan submitted a representation for revision of State allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under spouse policy. His wife viz. Smt. Anjum Bano is working under Government of M.P. The Administrative Department failed to furnish their comments. In the light of above, the Committee deferred the matter for its next meeting. |
| 49. | 49 | Shri Lakhan Lal Patel, Peon, D/o Revenue | In compliance of directions dated 18.11.2009 of Hon’ble High Court of Chhattisgarh, Shri Patel and Shri Khan submitted their representations for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. They contended that they are class IV employee and |
| 50. | 50 | Shri Sharif Khan, Peon, D/o Revenue W. P. No. 1145/2009 |
| opted for M.P. Department of General Administration, Government of M.P. informed that both the employees are posted in the State of Chhattisgarh. Department of Revenue, Government of Chhattisgarh has informed that Shri Sharif Khan is not willing to be re-allocated to M.P. due to his ensuing retirement on 30.06.2015. They have further informed that Shri Lakhan Patel has also withdrawn his request for his allocation to M.P. The above position has been confirmed by the O/o Commissioner Land Records, Chhattisgarh. In the light of above, the Committee recommended dropping this case from the agenda since Shri Khan and Shri Patel withdrew their respective requests. The Committee further recommended that a communication in this regard be sent by the Central Government to them through their Administrative Department as the Court’s order dated 18.11.2009 is to be complied with. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| 51. | 51 | Shri Sanjay Kumar Godale, Principal, D/o Tribal Welfare (Representation) | Shri Godale submitted a representation for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised policy dated 24.06.2010 for SC/ST employee. He belongs to SC category and is domicile/optee of M.P. Department of Tribal Welfare, M.P. informed that Shri Godale is posted in the State of Chhattisgarh. His service records are available with Government of Chhattisgarh which has been instructed vide letter dated 30.05 .2015 to furnish their comments to Central Government. Since the matter is being repeatedly deferred, the Committee took serious note of is and desired that the information be obtained from the Govt. of Chhattisgarh by Govt. of M.P./GAD and furnished to the Central Govt. The Committee deferred the matter for its next meeting |
| 52. | 52 | Shri Mahesh Kumar Pandey, BDO, D/o SC\&ST Welfare W A No. 728/2010 | This case was placed before the advisory committee in its $15^{\text {th }}$ meeting held on 29.12 .2010 in compliance of direction dated 17.08 .2009 passed in WP No. 956/2005. The Hon’ble Court held that the petitioner has raised a genuine ground about his |
| placement against Mr. Sant Saran Singh and Raj Kumar Joshi and have not been by the respondents. Hence, the allocation of the petitioner to the state of Chhattisgarh is illegal. In view of above the case was considered by the committee which recommended as under:- “The representative of Admin Department of the petitioner informed that the seniority of the petitioners in the light of the directions of Hon’ble High Court is under consideration and consequent upon change in seniority he is likely to be eligible for change of state cadre from Chhattisgarh to MP. The committee decided that the state Government should rectify the seniority of the petitioner and thereafter send the proposal regarding eligibility of change of state cadre of the petitioner.” The Administrative Department informed that Writ Appeal No. 728/2010 challenging the order dated 17.08.2009 has been rejected by the Hon’ble Court for being barred by limitations vide its order dated 05.03.2014. In the light of submission of Administrative Department, in compliance of court’s direction dated 17.08.2009, the Committee recommended revision of allocation of Shri Mahesh Kumar Pandey, BDO from Chhattisgarh to M.P. because his junior Shri Raj Kumar Joshi has been allocated to M.P. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| 53. | 53 | Shri T. S. Chakradhari, Sub-Engineer, D/o Water Resources (Representation) | The Administrative Department of Shri Chakradhari has confirmed the authenticity of caste certificate issued by Department of Tribal Welfare and domicile of Shri Chakradhari i.e. Rewa, M.P. They have already confirmed that he belongs to SC category. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered his representation and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Chakradhari from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised guidelines dated 24.06.2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to SC category and is domicile/optee of M.P. |
| 54. | 54 | Shri Rameshwar Dayal Gaur, Sub-Engineer, D/o Water Resources W.A. No. 712/2008 R P No. 270/2009 |
The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Gaur retired on 31.08.2014 and Shri Sankhla retired on 30.04 .2014 on superannuation. In the light of above facts, the Committee recommended that necessary action would be taken in accordance with guidelines dated 11.08.2008 with regard to dead/retired employee issued by the Central Government. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 55. | 55 | Shri Bhagat Singh Sankhla, Sub-Engineer, D/o Water Resources W P No. 1958/ 2005 | |
| 56. | 56 | Shri Mukul Jain, Asstt. Engineer, D/o Water Resources W P No. 1907/ 2009 | In compliance of directions dated 07.12.2009 of Hon’ble High Court of M.P. the representation of Shri Mukul Jain was considered by the Advisory Committee in its meeting held on 24.04.2011. The Committee recommended that “it was informed by the representatives of Department of the petitioner that issue of seniority of Assistant Engineers is pending in the Hon’ble Supreme Court. There is an interim order for maintaining the status quo. They also stated that further action on the representation of the petitioner in the light of directions dated 07.12.2009 of Hon’ble High Court would be possible after the final judgment of Supreme Court. The Committee, therefore, decided to accept the submission of representative in the meeting for keeping this case pending till the final decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court on the seniority issues of Assistant Engineers.” The Administrative Department has informed that seniority rank of Shri Jain was amended from 2014 to 1710 . In view of revision of his seniority rank, Shri Jain was promoted to the post of Executive Engineer vide order dated 29.11.2013 issued by WRD, Madhya Pradesh. The Administrative Department further informed that Shri Jain is working as Executive Engineer in the State of M.P. consequent upon his promotion. Now, no action is pending/required in the matter. In the light of the above submission of Administrative Department and Department of General Administration, Govt. of M.P., in compliance of directions dated 07.12.2009 of Hon’ble High Court of M.P., the Committee considered the representation and recommended |
| 57. | 57 | Shri Devendra Kumar Sharma, Sub-Engineer, D/o Water Resources W P No. 3673/2008 | The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Shrama retired on 30.06.2013 on superannuation. In the light of above facts, the Committee recommended that necessary action would be taken in accordance with guidelines dated 11.08.2008 with regard to dead/retired employee issued by the Central Government. |
| 58. | 58 | Shri C. D. Thakre, Asstt. Engineer, D/o Water Resources, W.P. 7734/2010 | The Administrative Department has informed that seniority rank of Shri Thakre was amended from 1844 to 1629. In view of revision of his seniority rank, Shri Thakre was promoted to the post of Executive Engineer vide order dated 21.05.2012 issued by WRD, Madhya Pradesh. The Administrative Department further informed that Shri Thakre is working as Executive Engineer in the State of M.P. consequent upon his promotion. Now, no action is pending/required in the matter. In the light of the above submission of Administrative Department and Department of General Administration, Govt. of M.P., in compliance of directions dated 28.6.2010 of Hon’ble High Court of M.P., the Committee considered the representation and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Thakre from Chhattisgarh to M.P. |
| 59. | 59 | Shri Narendra Kumar Gupta, Asstt. Engineer, D/o Water Resources WP No. 3821/2005 | In compliance of directions dated 14.12.2005 of Hon’ble High Court of M.P. the representation of Shri Gupta was considered by the Advisory Committee in its meeting held on 29.12.2010. The Committee recommended that “it was informed by the representatives of Department in the meeting that seniority of Assistant Engineers is pending for decision in the Hon’ble Supreme Court and there is an order of Hon’ble Court that the status quo is to be maintained. So the Committee decided to keep this case pending for change of State allocation till the seniority related case is decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.” |
| The Administrative Department has now informed that no case relating to seniority of Shri Gupta is pending before the Supreme Court. The information earlier furnished by the Administrative Department to the Committee is incorrect. Actually, Shri Gupta has to submit a representation in compliance of court’s directions dated 14.12.2005. No representation has yet been received from Shri Gupta. Therefore, no action is pending on the part of State Government. In the light of above, the Committee desired that representation be sought from Shri Gupta and reexamined in the light of Court’s directions. The Committee deferred the matter for its next meeting. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| 60. | 60 | Shri Prakash Chandra Sharma, Sub-Engineer, D/o Water Resources, R P No. 299/2013 | While disposing of W.P. No. 2868/2005, the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. Bench at Gwalior quashed on 03.07 .2007 the order with regard to allocation of petitioner to the State of Chhattisgarh. The above said order dated 03.07 .2007 was challenged by the State Government by preferring WA No. 299/2009. The appeal was dismissed by the Court with a liberty to the State to prefer a Review Petition against the order dated 03.07.2007. Accordingly, the State Government preferred Review Petition No. 299/2013. The Review Petition was also dismissed on 07.02.2014 by the Hon’ble Court recording that the State did not mention sufficient cause for delay. The application for condemnation of delay was also rejected. The Administrative Department informed that SLP has been filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India challenging the High Court’s order which is pending before the APEX Court. Subsequently it has been noted by the DOPT, Govt. of India that SLP No. 14785-14786/2015 filed by the State Govt. has been disposed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 04.09.2015. Judgement dated 04.09 .2015 is not available on the website of the Hon’ble Court. In the light of the above, the Committee desired that a copy of the order dated 04.09 .2015 be obtained from the Hon’ble Court. The matter would |
| be considered in compliance of the Hon’ble APEX Court’s directions. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| 61. | 61 | Shri Rajendra Singh Bhadoriya, Sub-Engineer, D/o PHE, W A No. 321/2011 |
While disposing of writ appeal on 13.03.2014, the Hon’ble High Court directed the Central Government to re-consider the representation made earlier by the petitioner against his allocation, and pass speaking order and communicate the same to him. The petitioner raised the following grounds in his earlier representation:- (i) He is domicile of M.P., also had opted for M.P. but was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option. (ii) His juniors viz. Shri Ghanshyam Aggarwal (Srl. No. 1358), Shri Satish Prakash Sahu (Srl. No. 1369), Shri Kailash Chandra Pansari (Srl. No. 1362), Shri K G Maheshwari (Srl. No. 697), Shri P K Saxena (Srl. No. 699), Shri S K Kureshi (Srl. No. 703), Shri Ram ji Tripathy (Srl. NO. 706), Shri R K Pathak (Srl. No. 708), Shri V K Sharma (Srl. No. 709), Shri R K Srivastava (Srl. No. 714), Shri V K Aggarwal (Srl. No. 715) and Shri K P Kushwaha (Srl. No. 716) were allocated to State of Madhya Pradesh. (iii)Allocation of Sub-Engineers to the State of Chhattisgarh was made in excess to the laid down percentage of 26.23 . |
| The Administrative Department informed that Shri K G Maheshwari (Srl. No. 697), Shri P K Saxena (Srl. No. 699), Shri S A Kureshi (Srl. No. 703), Shri Ram ji Tripathy (Srl. NO. 706), Shri R K Pathak (Srl. No. 708), Shri V K Sharma (Srl. No. 709), Shri R K Srivastava (Srl. No. 714), Shri Y K Aggarwal (Srl. No. 715) and Shri K P Kushwaha (Srl. No. 716) were allocated to M.P. on mutual transfer basis. They have further informed that Shri Ghanshyam Aggarwal (Srl. No. 1358), Shri Satish Prakash Sahu (Srl. No. 1369), Shri Kailash Chandra Pansari (Srl. No. 1362) were allocated to M.P. on the basis of seniority in lower pay scale i.e. Rs. $6500-10500 /-$ |
The Committee noted that 3 juniors to Shri Bhadoriya were allocated to M.P. in lower pay scale. The Committee desired whether above said 3
| juniors were given benefit of ACP with retrospective effect prior to/on 23.09.2000 however, orders to this effect were issued after publication of TFAL. The Committee desired to relook/revisit the matter and deferred it for next meeting. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| 62 . | 62 | Shri Ravindra Nath Parashar, Sub-Engineer, D/o PHE W P No. 1424/ 2011 |
While disposing of the Writ petition on 30.11 .13 the Hon’ble High Court the MP bench at Gwalior quashed the reliving order dated 03.02 .2011 issued by Engineer-in-Chief, PHE, Bhopal in respect of Shri Parashar for Chhattisgarh. The Hon’ble Court further granted liberty to the respondents to pass fresh order if any accordance with law. The petitioner raised the following grounds in his earlier representation:- (i) He is domicile of M.P., also had opted for M.P. but was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option. (ii) His parents are old aged and he is only male member to look after his family. (iii)His juniors viz. Shri P K Saxena and Shri V K Aggarwal were allocated to State of Madhya Pradesh. (iv)Sub-Engineers figuring at Srl. No. 856A, 871 and other Sub-Engineers who were placed below in the gradation list were retained in the State of M.P. (v) He has been working in the State of M.P. for more than 10 years after the final allocation. |
| The Administrative Department informed that Shri P K Saxena and Shri Y K Aggarwal were allocated to M.P. on mutual transfer basis. The Committee noted that the contention of petitioner for allocation of his juniors to M.P. is not valid and other grounds raised by petitioner are not covered by the guidelines of allocation and does not confer a right to the petitioner for his allocation to M.P. In the light of submission of Administrative Department, the Committee recommended rejection of representation of Shri Parashar. A speaking order shall be issued accordingly by the Central Government. |
| 63. | 63 | Shri Ravi Prakash Bajpai, Sub-Engineer, D/o PHE W P No. 2698/ 2005 W P No. 1425/ 2011 | In compliance of directions dated 12.04.2010 of Hon’ble High Court of M.P. passed in W P No. 2698/ 2005, the representation of Shri Bajpai was considered by the Advisory Committee in its $15^{\text {th }}$ meeting held on 29.12 .2010 and the Committee recommended rejection of representation of petitioner. The Committee further recommended that the draft speaking order would be prepared by the Administrative Department countering all the points raised by the petitioner in his representation. The Administrative Department could not clarify/justify allocation of juniors to Madhya Pradesh in draft speaking order. Therefore, the Administrative Department was again instructed to re-examine the allocation of his juniors to M. P. In the meantime, Shri Bajpai filed another writ petition No. 1425/2011. While disposing of the Writ petition on 30.11 .13 the Hon’ble High Court of MP Bench at Gwalior quashed the reliving order dated 03.02.2011 issued by Engineer-in-Chief, PHE, Bhopal in respect of Shri Bajpai for Chhattisgarh. The Hon’ble Court further granted liberty to the respondent to pass fresh order if any accordance with law. Shri Bajpai has contended that his juniors were allocated to M.P. The Administrative department did not furnish their fresh comments with regard to allocation of his juniors to M.P. The Committee noted that juniors to Shri Bajpai were allocated to M.P. in lower pay scale. The Committee instructed to the Administrative Department to clarify as to whether above said juniors were given benefit of ACP with retrospective effect prior to/on 23.09.2000 however, orders to this effect were issued after publication of TFAL. The Committee desired to re-look/revisit the matter and deferred for its next meeting. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 64. | 64 | Shri C. L. Kosta, Sub-Engineer, D/o PHE W P No. 4918/ 2005 | The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Kosta retired on 31.03.2013 and Shri Tiwari retired on 31.07.2013 on superannuation. In the light of above facts, the Committee recommended that necessary action would be |
| 66. | 66 | Shri N.K. Bulchandani, Sub-Engineer, D/o PHE (Representation) | taken in accordance with guidelines dated 11.08.2008 with regard to dead/retired employee issued by the Central Government. |
| Shri Bulchandani submitted a representation for revision of State allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under spouse policy. He has mentioned in his representation that his wife Smt. Deepa Bulchandani is working as Head Telephone Operator in State Bank of India, Sultania Road Branch, Bhopal, M.P. since 27.08.1984. In support of his claim, he has attached a certificate issued by State Bank of India with representation. | |||
| The Administrative Department of Shri Bulchandani informed that he had opted for State of M.P. and his services were tentatively allocated to State of M.P. However, after tentative allocation on the basis of mutual transfer, he was finally allocated to Chhattisgarh. | |||
| The Committee observed that Shri Bulchandani has represented that his wife Smt. Deepa Bulchani has been working in State Bank of India, Bhopal since 27.08.1984. The Committee further observed that he is eligible for allocation to opted State as per revised guidelines dated 24.03.2008 under spouse policy. | |||
| In the light of above, the Committee recommended revision of allocation of Shri Bulchandani from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under spouse policy as per revised guidelines dated 24.03.2008. | |||
| 67. | 67 | Shri Daru Lal Swarnkar, Sub-Engineer, D/o PHE W.A. No. 676/2012 | The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Swarnkar retired on 31.01.2014 on superannuation. |
| In the light of above facts, the Committee recommended that necessary action would be taken in accordance with guidelines dated 11.08.2008 with regard to dead/retired employee issued by the Central Government. | |||
| 68. | 68 | Shri Rakesh Kumar Goyal, Sub-Engineer, D/o PHE (Representation) | The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Goyal belongs to SC category, is domicile/optee of Madhya Pradesh and is employees of State cadre. |
| In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered his representation and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Goyal from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised guidelines dated 24.06.2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to SC category and is domicile/optee of M.P. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 69. | 69 | Shri Attar Singh Rajput, RHEO, D/o Horticulture W. P. No. 1159/ 2005 |
While passing the directions dated 15.12.2010, the Hon’ble High Court of M.P., Bench at Gwalior quashed the allocation order of the petitioners to the Chhattisgarh because the petitioners had been |
| 70. | 70 | Shri Chander Shekhar Rajput, RHEO, D/o Horticulture W P No. 1161/2005 |
serving in the State of M.P. after their allocation to Chhattisgarh for last 10 years in pursuance to the stay order. The Hon’ble Court further held that it would not be just and proper to again refer the matter to the appropriate Government for deciding the representation of the petitioners. The representative of DOPT, Govt. of India informed that during discussion with representative of Department of Horticulture in a meeting held on 03.09.2012, the Administrative Department was advised to file writ appeal against the above judgment dated 15.12.2010.The Administrative Department informed that Joint Director, Horticulture, Gwalior has been appointed OIC in the matter for filing writ appeal before the Court. In the light of submission of the Administrative Department, the Committee instructed to file writ appeals accordingly and intimate after filing the same. |
| 71. | 71 | Shri Vinod Singh Tomar, SHDO, D/o Horticulture W P No. 1189/ 2005 |
As seen from the website of Hon’ble High Court, the writ petition appears to be disposed of on 06.02.2008. However, copy of direction dated 06.02.08 and representation of petitioner are not available in this department. In absence of representation as well as court’s order dated 06.02.2008, the Central Government is not in a position to examine the matter and take necessary action. The Committee noted that Admin. Department has been repeatedly requested to |
| furnish a copy of order dated 06.02 .08 and representation received from petitioner along with their comments/recommendation. However, they failed to furnish the same. The Committee took serious note of it and expressed its displeasure. The Committee further instructed the Administrative Department to furnish a copy of order dated 06.02 .2008 and representation of the petitioner alongwith comments without any further delay so that the same can be considered in next meeting. The Committee accordingly deferred the matter. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| 72. | 72 | Shri Ramendra Singh Bais, RAEO, D/o Agriculture W A No. 774/2012 |
The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the Writ Appeal 774/2012 on 14.12 .12 for being barred by limitations. The said appeal was preferred before the Hon’ble High Court of MP bench at Gwalior challenging the order dated 15.12 .2010 passed in WP No. 1383/06. Wherein the Hon’ble Court held that no reasons were assigned by the Central Government while rejecting the representation and since the petitioner has continued in service in the State of M.P. for last about ten years on the strength of interim order passed by this court, the matter need not be remanded back for deciding the representation again. The Committee observed that in view of above position, the directions dated 15.12 .2010 of Hon’ble High Court is to be complied with. The Administrative Department of Shri Bais confirmed that his wife viz. Smt. Sadhna Singh Bais has been working as Shiksha Karmi in Government Girls School Pahadgarh, Muraina, M.P. since 09.09.1998. The Administrative Department informed that 19 junior RAEOs to Shri Bais were given the benefit of ACP with retrospective effect prior to 23.09.2000 but orders to this effect were issued after 01.09.2001. Out of them 17 RAEOs were allocated to the State of M.P. In the light of the above, the Committee noted that wife of Shri Bais is working in the State of |
| M.P. since 09.09.1998. The Committee further noted that 17 junior RAEOs to Shri Bais were given the benefit of ACP with retrospective effect and allocated to the State of M.P. Therefore, the Committee considered the matter and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Bais from Chhattisgarh to M.P. because junior RAEOs were allocated to M.P. and his wife is working under the Govt. of M.P. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
While disposing of MCC No. 155/2010 on 28.06.2010 the Hon’ble High Court directed the petitioner to submit the representation in compliance of its earlier order dated 10.02.2009 passed in WP No. 2701/2006 within a period of 30 days from the date of order.
Earlier, the representation of Shri Chaturvedi was considered by the advisory committee in its meetings held on 23.01 .2012 and recommended for rejection with following observations:-
“On the recommendation of Administrative Department of the petitioner the Committee decided to recommend his request for rejection because his claim for allocation to Madhya Pradesh is not tenable as his two juniors were allocated to MP under spouse policy and on the medical ground respectively.”
The Administrative Department has informed that Shri Chaturvedi was allocated to Chhattisgarh in pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000/- in general category on juniority basis (A/4 category). They further clarified that no junior to Shri Chaturvedi has been granted benefit of ACP with retrospective effect prior to 23.09 .2000 but issued after 01.09.2001. 3 juniors to Shri Chaturvedi viz. Shri D L Rajput, Shri Shiv Shankar Tomar and Shri Brij Kishore Sharma were allocated to M.P. due to incorrect seniority rank in the pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000/-. The Administrative Department further informed that allocation of above said three juniors to Shri Chaturvedi has been corrected by revising their allocation from M P to Chhattisgarh vide order No. 14/22/2007-SR(S)
| dated 10.03.2013 by Government of India. In the light of above, the Committee recommended rejection of representation of Shri Chaturvedi as grounds raised by him are not covered by the guidelines of allocation. The Committee noted that after revision of allocation of three juniors to Chhattisgarh on 10.04.2013, the claim of petitioner would no longer sustain. A speaking order shall be issued accordingly. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| 74. | 74 | Shri A. K. Silarpuriya, RAEO, D/o Agriculture W P No. 7621/ 2003 | The petitioner is working in the State of M.P. in compliance of directions dated 05.12.2003 passed by Hon’ble High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur. The petitioner was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option under junior most category (A-4) in the pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000/-on the basis of erroneous seniority rank 9538A. The petitioner has raised the issue of allocation of his junior RAEOs to M.P. in pay scale of Rs. $4000-6000 /-$ The Administrative Department has informed that the petitioner was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option under junior most category (A-4) in the pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000/- on the basis of erroneous seniority rank 9538A. His seniority rank was amended to 9358 . However, his allocation to Chhattisgarh remained unchanged. Seniority rank of Shri Silarpuriya is 231 in the pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000/-. The Administrative Department further informed that as per his revised seniority rank, 37 junior RAEOs to Shri Silarpuriya were allocated to M.P. in pay scale of Rs. $4000-6000 /-$ In the light of submission of Administrative Department, the Committee recommended revision of allocation of Shri A.K. Silarpuriya from Chhattisgarh to M.P. because 37 juniors RAEOs were allocated to M.P. |
| 75. | 75 | Shri Vijay Pal Singh Choudhary, RAEO, D/o Agriculture W P No. 3024/ 2010 | The petitioner is working in the State of M.P. in pursuance to stay order dated 10.03 .2010 granted by the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur. The petitioner was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option under junior most |
| category (A-4) in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000/- The petitioner has raised the issue of allocation of his junior RAEOs to M.P. in lower pay scale of Rs. $4000-6000 /-$ The Administrative Department has informed that the petitioner was allocated to Chhattisgarh under junior most category(A-4) in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000/-. Seniority rank of Shri Choudhary is 134 in the above pay scale. 63 RAEOs were given the benefit of ACP effective prior to 23.09 .2000 but issued after 01.09 .2001 . As per Final Allocation List 34 juniors were allocated to M.P. in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000/- in general category. Out of them 33 employees who were receiving the pay scale of 4000-6000, and Shri Sanjay Singh Tomar was allocated to M.P. in the pay scale of $4500-7000 /-$ due to error in seniority rank ( 7433 A in place of 9554). His allocation remained unchanged in spite of error being noticed. As per information provided by the Administrative Department, it is clear that junior RAEOs to the petitioner were allocated to M.P. in lower pay scale and they were given benefit of ACP with retrospective effect. The Committee noted the above facts and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Vijay Pal Singh Choudhary from Chhattisgarh to M.P. since his juniors were allocated to M.P. in lower pay scale. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| 76. | 76 | Shri J.P. Sharma, RAEO, D/o Agriculture W. P. No. 2905/ 2010 |
The petitioner is working in the State of M.P. in pursuance to stay order dated 05.03 .2010 granted by the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur. The petitioner was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option under junior most category (A-4) in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000/-. The petitioner has raised the issue of allocation of his junior RAEOs to M.P. in lower pay scale of Rs. $4000-6000 /-$ The Administrative Department has informed that the petitioner was allocated to Chhattisgarh under junior most category(A-4) in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000/-. Seniority rank of Shri Sharma is 230 in the above pay scale. 69 RAEOs |
| were given the benefit of ACP effective prior to 23.09.2000 but issued after 01.09.2001. As per Final Allocation List, 63 juniors were allocated to M.P. in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000/- in general category. Out of them 61 employees who were receiving the pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000 and allocated to M.P. Shri Sanjay Singh Tomar was allocated to M.P. in the pay scale of 4500-7000/- due to error in seniority rank (7433A in place of 9554) and Shri R K Shukla was allocated to M.P. in pay scale of 3500-5200/- due to error in seniority rank and pay scale (8940 in the pay scale of 3500-5200 in place of 8940 in pay scale of 4500-7000). Their allocation remained unchanged in spite of error being noticed. As per information provided by the Administrative Department, it is clear that junior RAEOs to the petitioner were allocated to M.P. in lower pay scale and they were given benefit of ACP with retrospective effect. The Committee noted the above facts and recommended revision of allocation of Shri J.P. Sharma from Chhattisgarh to M.P. since his juniors were allocated to M.P. in lower pay scale. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| 77. | 77 | Shri Gajanand Sharma, RAEO, D/o Agriculture W. P. No. 4365/ 2006 | In compliance of directions dated 16.04.2008, Shri Sharma submitted his representation raising following grounds: – (i) He had opted for the State of M.P. (ii) He was transferred to Chhattisgarh on mutual transfer basis; however, he had withdrawn his request for transfer to Chhattisgarh. He is domicile of M.P. and wants to remain in the State of M.P. (iii) His representation dated 28.02.2005 has not been decided till date despite court’s directions. (iv) As per provisions of M.P. State Reorganization Act, 2000 orders for allocation/transfer may only be issued within one year and may not be thereafter. (v) In spite of his request for serving in the State of M.P., the Government of India approved his mutual transfer vide letter dated 17.09 .2003 and orders for his |
transfer from M.P. to Chhattisgarh were issued on 07.06.2004.
The Administrative Department informed that Shri Sharma was finally allocated to State of M.P. as per his option in the pay scale of 4500-7000. After publication of final allocation list, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 12.12.2002 for mutual transfer from M.P. to Chhattisgarh with Shri K K Srivastava, RAEO who was finally allocated to Chhattisgarh under junior most category. The above said representation was forwarded to Central Government with mutual consent of both the State Governments. The Central Government issued instructions on 17.09.2003 for State Government to consider the representations received from the State Government including the representation of petitioner in the light of letter dated 01.05.2003 after defining the terms and conditions for such consideration or by framing suitable rules for this purpose. Accordingly, State Government issued order for mutual transfer of Shri Sharma and Shri K K Srivastava to the States of Chhattisgarh and M.P. respectively. The petitioner viz. Shri Sharma was relieved for the State of Chhattisgarh vide order dated 07.06.2004.
The Committee observed that Shri Sharma was allocated to M.P. as per his option. Later on, he was transferred to State of Chhattisgarh in mutual exchange with Shri K K Srivastava. The Central Government had not issued order with regard to his mutual transfer. It only instructed the State Government concerned to consider such cases of mutual transfer in the light of letter dated 01.05.2003 issued by Central Government. The said letter dated 01.05.2003 contains instructions to the State Governments to consider the request of mutual transfer based on broad consensus arrived between the State Governments inter alia defining the terms and conditions for such considerations or by framing suitable rules for this purpose.
The Committee further observed that the State
| Government issued order for mutual transfer in respect of Shri Sharma and Shri K. K. Srivastava with mutual consent of both the State Governments i.e. M.P. and Chhattisgarh. The Committee noted that the petitioner was allocated to M.P. as per his option. Later on, he was transferred to Chhattisgarh on his request by the State Government. In the light of the above, the Committee recommended rejection of his representation. A speaking order shall be issued accordingly. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| 78. | 78 | Smt. Monika Navrang, Deputy Registrar, D/o Commercial Tax, (Representation) | Smt. Navrang has submitted a representation for revision of his state allocation from M.P. to Chhattisgarh. She has mentioned in her representation that she belongs to SC category and is domicile of district Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. Her husband Shri Rakesh Kumar Navrang is working as Bio-medical Engineer in Chhattisgarh, Ayurvedic Sansthan, Bilaspur. She has referred the letter dated 24.06.2010 issued by Government of India whereby SC/ST employees were given an opportunity for revision of State allocation. The Administrative Department informed that Smt. Navrang was appointed vide order no. 8/stha.sewa/02/2002 dated 04.03.2002.The Administrative Department further informed that the Department of General Administration opined that Smt. Navrang was appointed on 04.03.2002 after final allocation of employees by Government of India. There is no instruction issued by Department of General Administration, M.P. for allocation of employees appointed after final allocation. The Committee noted that Smt. Navrang was appointed in government service after the appointed day for allocation i.e. 01.11.2000. Therefore, her services are not allocable under M.P. Re-organization Act, 2000. In the light of above, the Committee did not consider the representation as it does not fall within the purview of it. |
| 79. | 79 | Shri Raghuveer Singh Bhadoriya, Veterinary Asstt. Surgeon, D/o Animal Husbandry W. A. No. 386/2007 |
While disposing of W. A. No. 386/2007 on 19.03.2014, the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. held that the instant writ appeal is allowed with following directions:- (i) The order of learned single judge passed on 12.09 .2006 in W. P. No. 2443/2005 is set-aside. (ii) The Central Government is directed to re-consider the representation made earlier by the petitioner against his final allocation, pass speaking order and communicate the same to the petitioner within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (iii) In case, the order passed by Central Government pursuant to this order is adverse to the interest of the petitioner then the petitioner may assail the same in accordance with law for which status quo in regard to his service conditions shall be maintained till 30 days of the date of receipt of adverse order passed by the Central Government. Shri Bhadoriya raised following grounds in his old representation. (i) His junior Dr. K K Sharma and Dr. Hemant Kumar Pathak were allocated to the State of M.P. (ii) Some other juniors were not given the benefit of ACP while they were eligible and they were allocated to M.P. in lower pay scale. |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Administrative Department informed that Dr. K. K. Sharma and Shri Hemant Kumar Pathak were allocated to MP. On mutual transfer basis. They have further clarified that 9 junior Assistant Veterinary Surgeons were not given ACP in the pay scale of Rs. 10000-15200/- before publication of TFAL. 9 other junior were given the benefit of ACP in the pay scale of Rs. 10000-15200/- but effective after 23.09 .2000 as they had not completed 12 years of their service. Therefore, they were placed in lower pay scale. |
| In the light of above, the Committee recommended rejection of representation of Shri Bhadoriya as his 9 juniors were not given the benefit of ACP and 9 other juniors were allocated to M.P. in lower pay scale because they were not eligible for ACP prior to/on 23.09.2000. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 80. | 80 | Smt. Manju Shukla, Project Officer, D/o Woman \& Child Development, WP No. 24/2009 |
While disposing of W. P. No. 24/2009 on 03.09.13, the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur quashed the order No. 14/76/04-SR(S) dated $5 / 13.01 .05$ passed by the Union of India whereby the representation of the petitioner was rejected. The Hon’ble Court further quashed the allocation order dated 08.08 .02 allocating the petitioner to Chhattisgarh and consequential order of relieving dated 15.12.08. The Hon’ble Court allowed the petitioner to continue in services of the State of Madhya Pradesh only and to work on her post. The Committee noted that the petitioner was allocated to Chhattisgarh as per her option. Later on, after final allocation, the petitioner had changed her option from Chhattisgarh to M.P. and requested for allocation to M.P. on the basis of her changed option for M.P. under women employee category. However, Administrative Department had recommended her allocation to M.P. but representation of the petitioner was rejected by the Central Government after due consideration. In view of above, in its last meeting, the Committee recommended to file appeal against the above said order dated 03.09 .2013 of the Hon’ble Court. Smt. Shukla has submitted a fresh representation for her retention in the State of M.P. being woman employee on sympathetic grounds. Department of Women and Child Development, Govt. of M.P. has informed that Writ Appeal No. 897/2014 preferred by the State Govt. has been dismissed by the Hon’ble High Court on 29.06.2015. The Administrative Department has submitted that in view of the |
| dismissal of writ appeal, the Court’s order dated 03.09.2013 passed by W.P. No. 24/2009 is to be complied with by allocating Smt. Shukla to M.P. The representative of the Central Govt. informed that as advised by the Department of Legal Affairs, Govt. of India, the Central Govt. is of view that SLP be not filed in the Hon’ble Apex Court challenging the Order dated 29.06.2015 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. in WA No. 897/2014. The Committee noted that since the Govt. of M.P. and the Central Govt. are to consider the representation of Smt. Shukla for allocation to M.P. in compliance of the Court’s directions dated 03.09.2013, consent of the Govt. of Chhattisgarh be obtained. On receipt of the consent, the matter be considered by the Central Govt. in the light of the consent of both the State Govts. and necessary orders would be passed accordingly. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| 81. | 81 | Shri Krishan Kumar Kori, Asstt. Grade – III, D/o Commerce and Industry, (Representation) | The Administrative Department of Shri Kori confirmed that he belongs to SC category, is domicile of M.P. and had opted for M.P. He was allocated to Chhattisgarh on juniority basis (A-4 category). In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered the representation and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Krishan Kumar Kori from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised guidelines dated 24.06 .2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to SC category and is domicile/optee of M.P. |
| 82. | 82 | Shri Vivek Barde, Assistant Grade-I, D/o Technical Education, (Representation) | Shri Barde has submitted a representation for revision of State allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under policy for allocation of victims of Bhopal Gas Tragedy. He has mentioned in representation that he had received a compensation of Rs. 50000/-. The Administrative Department has informed that Shri Barde was allocated to the State of Chhattisgarh as per his option under (A-2 category) in accordance with the guidelines of allocation. |
| In the light of the submission of the Administrative Department, the Committee considered representation of Shri Barde and recommended rejection of his representation. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
Smt. Tripathi submitted a representation for revision of State allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under sympathetic grounds.
The Administrative Department has informed that it has already conveyed its consent vide their letter dated 25.02 .2015 for transfer of Smt. Tripathi to M.P. They have further given ‘no objection’ to transfer of Smt. Tripathi being a women employee.
The Committee noted that service and allocation details of Smt. Tripathi have not been furnished by the Administrative Department. State Govt. only has given its consent on her transfer from Chhattisgarh to M.P.
Taking note of the above, the Committee deferred the matter for its next meeting and instructed the Administrative Department to furnish the service/allocation details of Smt. Tripathi supported by TFAL, FAL and complete information indicating cadre, option, basis of allocation to the Central Government.