This document contains the minutes of the 24th meeting of the Advisory Committee for Madhya Pradesh, held in Bhopal on May 13, 2014. The meeting, chaired by Ms. Archana Verma, Joint Secretary (AT&A/SR), considered representations from State Government employees regarding their allocation between Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. The committee reviewed 79 cases, with recommendations for acceptance, rejection, dropping, or deferral. Key discussions included compliance with High Court directions, consideration of SC/ST category employees, spouse policy, and medical hardship cases. The minutes detail individual cases, the administrative department’s findings, and the committee’s recommendations, often related to revising or maintaining employee allocations between the two states.
SOURCE PDF LINK :
Click to access MinutesTwentyFourthACmeetingMP.pdf
Click to view full document content
No.14/3/2006-SR(S) Vol.-IV
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training
3rd Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan,
Khan Market, New Delhi-110 003.
To
Date: 19.06.2014
19 JUN 2014
The Principal Secretary
Department of General Administration
Government of Madhya Pradesh
Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal
Madhya Pradesh – 462 004.
The Principal Secretary,
Department of General Administration
Government of Chhattisgarh
D K S Bhawan, Raipur,
Chhattisgarh-492 001.
Subject: Minutes of the 24th meeting of the Advisory Committee, Madhya Pradesh held at 12:00 Noon on 13.05.2014 in Room No.315, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh under the Chairmanship of Ms. Archana Verma, Joint Secretary (AT&A/SR) – regarding.
Sir,
I am directed to forward, herewith, a copy of the minutes of the 24th meeting of the Advisory Committee held under the Chairmanship of Ms. Archana Verma, Joint Secretary (AT&A/SR) at 12:00 Noon on 13.05.2014 in Room No. 315, Third Floor, Mantralaya, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh for consideration of the representations of State Government employees in compliance with the directions given by the Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh/Chhattisgarh and other representations of employees under SC/ST category, spouse policy etc.
- The orders for revision/rejection of allocation would be issued separately by the Government of India.
Encl: as above.
Yours faithfully,
(A.K. Malhotra)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
011-24651898
E-mail: malhotra.ak13@nic.in
Copy to:
The Principal Secretaries,
- D/o Water Resources, Government of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
- D/o Water Resources, Government of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
- D/o Farmers’ Welfare & Agriculture Development, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, MP.
- D/o Agriculture, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
- D/o Horticulture, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
- D/o Horticulture, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
… 2/-7. D/o Public Health & Family Welfare, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
8. D/o Public Health & Family Welfare, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
9. D/o Ayush, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
10. D/o Ayush, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
11. D/o Public Works, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
12. D/o Public Works, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
13. D/o Home, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
14. D/o Home, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
15. D/o Animal Husbandry, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
16. D/o Animal Husbandry, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
17. D/o School Education, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
18. D/o School Education, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
19. D/o Technical Education, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
20. D/o Technical Education, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
21. D/o Fisheries, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
22. D/o Fisheries, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
23. D/o Social Welfare, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
24. D/o Social Welfare, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
25. D/o Housing & Environment, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
26. D/o Housing & Environment, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
27. D/o Public Health Engineering, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
28. D/o Public Health Engineering, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
29. D/o Commerce & Industry, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
30. D/o Commerce & Industry, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
31. D/o Women & Child Development, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
32. D/o Women & Child Development, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
33. D/o Employment & Training, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
34. D/o Employment & Training, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
35. D/o Rural Industries, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
36. D/o Rural Industries, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
37. D/o Education, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
38. D/o Education, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
39. D/o Panchayat & Rural Development, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
40. D/o Panchayat & Rural Development, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
41. D/o Revenue, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
42. D/o Revenue, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
43. D/o Weight & Measurement, Govt. of MP, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.
44. D/o Weight & Measurement, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
Copy also for information to:
(i) PS to JS(AT&A/SR)
(ii) PA to Director(SR)
(A.K. Malhotra)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
011-24651898
E-mail: malhotra.ak13@nic.in# Minutes of the $24^{\text {th }}$ Meeting of Advisory Committee, Madhya Pradesh held on $13^{\text {th }}$ May, 2014 at 12:00 Noon in Room No. 315, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal under the Chairmanship of Ms. Archana Varma, JS (AT \& A).
The $24^{\text {th }}$ meeting of Advisory Committee was convened at Bhopal at 12:00 Noon on 13.05.2014, under the Chairmanship of Ms. Archana Varma, Joint Secretary (AT \& A), DOPT, Government of India to consider the representations received from the employees of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh either in compliance of the court’s directions or received directly. The list of attendees is enclosed as Annexure “A” to the minutes. 2. Shri K. Suresh, Principal Secretary, Department of General Administration, Government of M.P., Member Secretary, Advisory Committee, welcomed the Chairperson and other members of the Committee and thereafter, with the permission of the Chair, took up the agenda of the meeting for discussion. The Committee considered 79 cases, in total. Details are given below:-
| No. of total cases considered | No. of cases recommended for acceptance | No. of cases recommended for rejection | No. of cases recommended to drop | No. of cases recommended to defer |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 79 | 30 | 11 | 10 | 28 |
Recommendations of the Committee in each individual case are reflected in the last column of the following table/minutes:-
| Sr.
No. | Name, Designation,
Department \& W.P./Writ
Appeal No. | Recommendations of the Committee |
| — | — | — |
| 1 | Shri Narendra Singh
Yadav,
Sub-Engineer, WRD
(W.A. No. 358/11) | In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble
High Court of M.P. dated 13.03.2012, the
representation of Shri Yadav was considered by
the Committee. The Administrative Department
admitted that Shri Yadav’s juniors viz. Shri
Rakesh Kumar Jain, Shri Vijay Kumar, Shri
Satyanarayan Srivastava, Shri Kailash Narayan
Raghuvanshi, Shri S K Soni, Shri Sridhar Chokse,
Shri Shyam Lal Soni, Shri Prabhu Lal Kumar and
Shri Pradeep Kumar Vaidya were given higher
pay scale Rs. 8000-13500/-, under ACP scheme,
with retrospective effect, i.e. effective before
23.09.2000 but were allocated to M.P. in lower
pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500/-. The Committee
considered these facts and recommended || | | revision of allocation of Shri Narendra Singh Yadav, Sub-Engineer from Chhattisgarh to Madhya Pradesh on the ground that his juniors were allocated to M.P. |
| — | — | — |
| 2 | Shri Manoj Kumar Kalosiya, Sub-Engineer, WRD
(WP No. 15011/06) | This case was deferred in the last meeting for want of confirmation whether Shri Kalosia is still in service or has expired. The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Kalosiya had expired on 19.08.2009. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended to drop this case from the agenda. |
| 3 | Shri Suresh Chandra Sharma, Sub-Engineer, WRD
(WA No. 220/11) | In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P dated 13.03.2012, the representation of Shri Sharma was considered by the Committee. The Administrative Department admitted that Shri Suresh Chandra Sharma stood retired on 30.04.2014. Since Sharma was working under the Government of M.P. till his retirement and was not relieved for the State of Chhattisgarh in pursuance of Court’s order, the Committee recommended revision of allocation of Shri Suresh Chandra Sharma, Sub-Engineer from Chhattisgarh to Madhya Pradesh as he stood retired on 30.04.2014 serving under the Government of M.P. in accordance with clarifications dated 11.08.2008 which warrants allocation of dead/retired employee in that successor State, which they were serving last at the time of death/retirement. |
| 4 | Shri A. K. Gupta, Sub-Engineer, WRD
(W. P. No. 5729/06) | In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 15.11.2011, the representation of Shri Gupta was considered by the Committee. The Administrative Department admitted that Shri Gupta’s mother is suffering from paralysis. The Committee considered the representation sympathetically and recommended revision of allocation of Shri A. K. Gupta, Sub-Engineer from Chhattisgarh to Madhya Pradesh under medical hardships category on the ground that his mother is suffering from serious disability. |
| 5 | Shri Dev Prakash Panik, Sub-Engineer, WRD
(WP No. 1772/13) | In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of Chhattisgarh dated 26.06.2013, the representation of Shri Panik was considered by the Committee. The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Panik belongs to SC category, is domicile of Chhattisgarh and had also opted for Chhattisgarh. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended revision of allocation || | | of Shri Dev Prakash Panik, Sub-Engineer from M.P. to Chhattisgarh under revised policy dated 24.06.2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to SC category and is domicile/optee of Chhattisgarh. |
| :–: | :–: | :–: |
| 6 | Shri Pramod Singh Minj, Sub-Engineer, WRD
(WP No. 1773/13) | In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of Chhattisgarh dated 24.06.2013, the representation of Shri Minj was considered by the. The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Minj belongs to ST category, is a domicile of Chhattisgarh and had also opted for Chhattisgarh. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended revision of allocation of Shri Pramod Singh Minj, Sub-Engineer from M.P. to Chhattisgarh under revised policy dated 24.06.2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to ST category and is domicile/optee of Chhattisgarh. |
| 7 | Shri Om Prakash Jain, Assistant Engineer, WRD
(W P No. 3072/05) | In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P dated 19.06.2013, the representation of Shri Om Prakash Jain was considered by the Committee. The Administrative Department admitted that wife of Shri Om Prakash Jain viz. Smt. Sunita Jain is working as Lower Division Teacher in Govt. Girls Padma School, Gwalior, M.P. since 08.08.1997. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended revision of allocation of Shri Om Prakash Jain, Assistant Engineer from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under spouse policy as his wife is working with the Government of M.P. |
| 8 | Shri H. K. Srivatri, Manchitrakar, WRD (Representation) |
The Committee considered the representation of Shri Srivatri for revision of his allocation from M.P. to Chhattisgarh under medical hardships category. The Administrative Department informed that Shri Srivatri was allocated to Chhattisgarh as per his option. Later on, he applied for mutual transfer to M.P. with Shri K K Khare. After acceptance of his request, he was transferred to M.P. The Committee observed that Shri Srivatri had already been transferred to M.P. as per his request. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended rejection of representation of Shri Srivatri as he was allocated to Chhattisgarh as per option and thereafter he himself got mutual transfer to M.P. | 9 | Shri Arun Kumar Jain, Sub-Engineer, WRD (W P No. 2001/13) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of Chhattisgarh dated 19.07.2013, the representation of Shri Jain was considered by the Committee. The Administrative Department admitted that Shri Jain is a domicile of Chhattisgarh and had also opted for Chhattisgarh. Govt. of M.P. as well as Govt. of Chhattisgarh has given no objection for revision of his allocation from M.P. to Chhattisgarh. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended revision of allocation of Shri Arun Kumar Jain, Sub-Engineer from M.P. to Chhattisgarh. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | Shri Ramesh Kumar Kosta, Sub-Engineer, WRD (Representation) | The Committee considered the representation of Shri Kosta for his retention in Chhattisgarh. The Administrative Department of Shri Kosta informed that he was allocated to Chhattisgarh against his option for M.P. under A-4 category on juniority basis. Shri Kosta is a physically handicapped employee. Therefore, he had applied for revision of his allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. His request was accepted by the Central Government and accordingly, his allocation was revised from Chhattisgarh to M.P. vide order dated 27.06.2005. However, he has not yet been relieved for M.P. Now, he has been promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer in Chhattisgarh and wants to remain in Chhattisgarh. The Govt. of M.P. as well as Govt. of Chhattisgarh has given no objection for his retention in the State of Chhattisgarh. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered his representation and recommended cancellation of revision of allocation of Shri Ramesh Kumar Kosta, SubEngineer (Sr. No. 5 of order No. 14/38/2005SR(S) dated 27.06.2005) and to adhere earlier allocation of Shri Kosta to the State of Chhattisgarh. | ||||
| 11 | Shri Vijay Kant Kumawat, Tracer, WRD (Representation) |
The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Kumawat belongs to SC category, is domicile of M.P. and had also opted for M.P. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered his representation and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Vijay Kant Kumawat, Tracer from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised policy dated 24.06.2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to SC category and is domicile/optee of M.P. | 12 | Shri Rewa Ram Yadav, SADO, Farmers’ Welfare \& Agricultural Development (W P No. 1508/06) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 15.11.11, the representation of Shri Yadav was considered by the Committee. Shri Yadav raised the ground of allocation of 13 junior SADOs to the State of M.P. The Administrative Department having reexamined the representation, informed that 10 junior SADOs were allocated to Madhya Pradesh as they were going to retire in next two years from the appointed day. Remaining three were allocated to M.P. due to various reasons. Administrative Department further clarified that initially, the name of Shri B. L. Thakur (Sr. Rank 1848) was not included in the TFAL. While his name was included in FAL after amendment in the seniority rank. He was wrongly allocated to M.P. on the basis of incorrect seniority rank. Shri Suresh Babu Sharma was allocated to M.P. being senior in the pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000 on the basis of wrong seniority rank due to data feeding error. His seniority rank was erroneously shown 188 in place of 1850. Name of Shri R.C. Chandrakar (Sr. Rank 1965) was included in the TFAL of RAEOs receiving the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000 showing incorrect seniority rank 2138. Being senior in the cadre of RAEOs Shri Chandrakar was allocated to M.P. It was observed that all these facts were brought to the notice of the then State Advisory Committee during the final allocation of employees but the Committee decided that the allocation of above said three juniors need not be changed. The Committee after perusing the facts explained by the Administrative Department as well as Department of General Administration, Govt. of M.P. and Chhattisgarh, viewed that decision of the then State Advisory Committee, not to change allocation of Shri B. L. Thakur, Shri Suresh Babu Sharma and Shri R.C. Chandrakar was not in order. Therefore, the Committee recommended correction of the allocation of above said three SADOs viz. S/Sh. B. L. Thakur, Suresh Babu Sharma and R.C. Chandrakar by revising their allocation from M.P. to Chhattisgarh. After revising allocation of above said three SADOs to Chhattisgarh, the ground raised by Shri Yadav would no longer sustain. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended rejection of representation of Shri Rewa Ram Yadav, SADO for revision of allocation from |
|
| :–: | :–: | :–: | Chhattisgarh to M.P. After issue of order for revision of allocation of S/Sh. B. L. Thakur, Suresh Babu Sharma and R.C. Chandrakar, all SADOs from M.P. to Chhattisgarh, a detailed speaking order shall be issued. | |||
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 13 | Shri Kirti Kumar Jain, RAEO, Farmers’ Welfare \& Agricultural Development (WP No. 1509/06) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 15.11.11, the representation of Shri Jain was considered by the Committee. The Administrative Department admitted that 16 junior RAEOs were given higher pay scale of Rs.4500-7000, under ACP scheme, with retrospective effect, i.e. effective before 23.09.2000 but were allocated to M.P. in lower pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000. Shri Jain’s juniors viz. Shri Sanjay Singh Tomar (Sr. Rank 9554) and Shri V. Srivastava (Sr. Rank 9656) were also allocated to M.P. in the Pay Scale of Rs. 45007000. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended revision of allocation of Shri Kirti Kumar Jain, RAEO from Chhattisgarh to Madhya Pradesh on the ground that his juniors were allocated to M.P. | ||||
| 14 | Shri Ram Lal Singh Kushwaha, SADO, Farmers’ Welfare Agricultural Dev (W P No. 1165/06) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 03.10.2007, the representation of Shri Kushwaha was considered by the Committee. Shri Kuashwaha raised the ground of allocation of 15 junior SADOs to the State of M.P. The Administrative Department having examined the representation, informed that 12 junior SADOs were allocated to Madhya Pradesh as they were going to retire in next two years from the appointed day. Remaining three were allocated to M.P. due to various reasons. Administrative Department further clarified that initially, the name of Shri B. L. Thakur (Sr. Rank 1848) was not included in the TFAL. While his name was included in FAL after amendment in the seniority rank. He was wrongly allocated to M.P. on the basis of incorrect seniority rank. Shri Suresh Babu Sharma was allocated to M.P. being senior in the pay scale of Rs. $5000-8000$ on the basis of wrong seniority rank due to data feeding error. His seniority rank was erroneously shown 188 in place of 1850. Name of Shri R.C. Chandrakar (Sr. Rank 1965) was included in the TFAL of RAEOs receiving the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000 showing incorrect Sr. rank 2138. Being senior in the cadre of RAEOs, Shri Chandrakar was allocated to M.P. It was observed that all these facts were brought to the notice of the then | State Advisory Committee during the final allocation of employees but the Committee decided that the allocation of above said three juniors need not be changed. The Committee after perusing the facts explained by the Administrative Department as well as Department of General Administration, Govt. of M.P. and Chhattisgarh, viewed that decision of the then State Advisory Committee, not to change allocation of Shri B. L. Thakur, Shri Suresh Babu Sharma and Shri R.C. Chandrakar was not in order. Therefore, the Committee recommended correction of the allocation of above said three SADOs viz. S/Sh. B. L. Thakur, Suresh Babu Sharma and R.C. Chandrakar by revising their allocation from M.P. to Chhattisgarh. After revising allocation of above said three SADOs to Chhattisgarh, the ground raised by Shri Kushwaha would no longer sustain. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended rejection of representation of Shri Ram Lal Singh Kushwaha, SADO for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. After issue of order for revision of allocation of S/Sh. B. L. Thakur, Suresh Babu Sharma and R.C. Chandrakar, all SADOs from M.P. to Chhattisgarh, a detailed speaking order shall be issued. |
|||
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 15 | Shri L. S. Rajput, RAEO, Farmers’ Welfare Agricultural Development (W P No. 2708/06) |
The Administrative Department informed that Writ Appeal No. 18/2013 was filed in the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. challenging the order dated 14.12.2011 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. in W.P. No. 2708/2006. The said appeal has been disposed of on 06.03 .2014 by the Hon’ble High Court with a direction to reconsider the old representation of the petitioner. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended that old representation of Shri Rajput be re-examined by the Administrative Department and detailed/specific comments on the points raised by the petitioner may be furnished to the Central Government. The Committee recommended to place this case alongwith comments in its next meeting. | 16 | Shri Watan Jadhav, RAEO, Farmers’ Welfare & Agricultural Development (Representation) | The Committee considered the representations of Shri Jadhav, Shri Kumhar and Shri Uike. The Administrative Departments in Government of Chhattisgarh confirmed that they belong to SC category, are domicile of M.P. and had opted for M.P. However, Government of M.P. sought further time to verify/check their service records. The Committee recommended revision of their allocation to M.P. subject to verification of the facts by Government of M.P. within two weeks. The Committee also desired that copies of their representations be sent to their Administrative Departments. However, after a lapse of one month, confirmation/verification has not been received from Government of M.P. despite reminder As such these cases may be treated as deferred. | |
| —— | —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————- | Rampure has withdrawn his request for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended to drop this case from agenda. | ||||
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 22 | Shri Ashok Kumar Kannoji, Asstt. Grade-III, Horticulture (Representation) |
The Administrative Department of Shri Kannoji 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 such non-State cadre employees were issued. Therefore, consideration of allocation of non-State cadre employee does not fall within the purview of State Advisory Committee. As such the Committee did not consider the representation. However, the Committee, taking a sympathetic view, opined that his request may be considered by both the State Governments of M.P. and Chhattisgarh with mutual consent. | ||||
| 23 | Dr. Pradeep Kumar Agrawal, Medical Officer, Public Health and Family Welfare (OA No. 4649/02) (WP No. 21564/03) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 15.09.2003, the representation of Dr. Agrawal was considered by the Committee. Dr. Agrawal has requested for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. stating that he is a domicile of M.P. and had also opted for M.P. The Administrative Department informed that his home district was mentioned as Durg, Chhattisgarh in his service book. No such application requesting for change of home district is available in his service book. They have also confirmed that any such representation for change of home district had never been received at any point of time before State allocation from Dr. Agrawal. He was allocated to Chhattisgarh under A-3 category (Home district) as per existing guidelines of allocation. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended rejection of representation of Dr. Pradeep Kumar Agrawal, Medical Officer for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. A detailed speaking order shall be issued. | ||||
| 24 | Smt. Neema Raghuvanshi, Mahila Swasthya Karyakarta, Public Health and Family Welfare (WP No.771/11) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of Chhattisgarh dated 14.02.2013, this case was placed before the Committee. The Administrative Department of Smt. Neema Raghuvanshi informed that she 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 such non-State cadre employees were issued. Therefore, consideration of allocation of non-State cadre employee does not fall within the purview of State Advisory Committee. As such the Committee did not consider the representation. However, taking note of the views of Department of General Administration, M.P., the Committee opined that her request for mutual transfer may be considered by both the State Governments of M.P. and Chhattisgarh with mutual consent. | |||
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 25 | Dr. Ramesh Kumar Neema, Medical Specialist, Public Health and Family Welfare (WP No. 1836/07) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 30.11.2011, the representation of Dr. Neema was considered by the Committee. Dr. Neema contended that 65 Medical Specialists (whose name have been given by Dr. Neema), junior to him, were receiving the pay scale of Rs. 12000-16500 but had been shown in the scale of Rs.10000-15200. He further contended that Dr. Ram Chandra Sharma and 23 other Specialist Doctors (whose names have been given by Dr. Neema), junior to him, were receiving the pay scale of Rs. 12000-16500/- were allocated to M.P. The Administrative Department did not furnish specific/detailed comments on contentions of Dr. Neema. However, Administrative Department sought time to further examine the matter. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended that the position be verified and checked within one month whether juniors have been given ACP with retrospective effect after the cut-off date i.e. 23.09 .2000 and reported to the Central Government with detailed/specific comments on allocation of his juniors to M.P. Therefore, the Committee deferred this case for its next meeting. | ||||
| 26 | Shri Ram Kumar Jatav, Health Supervisor, Public Health and Family Welfare (Representation) | The Central Government is in receipt of a representation from Shri Jatav for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under SC/ST policy. However, his Administrative Department informed that no representation from Shri Jatav for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. has been received so far. The Committee recommended revision of his allocation to M.P. subject to verification of the facts by Government of M.P. within two weeks. The Committee also desired that a copy of the representation be sent to his Administrative | Department. However, after a lapse of one month, confirmation/verification has not been received from Government of M.P. despite reminder As such this case may be treated as deferred. | |||
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 27 | Dr. Kailash Chandra Mahajan, AMO, AYUSH, (WP No.6775/06) | In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 15.11.2011 and 28.02.2012, the representations of the petitioners were considered by the Committee. They have | ||||
| 28 | Dr. Kunwar Pal Singh, AMO, AYUSH, (WP No. 6774/06) |
contended that some AMOs junior to them were allocated to M.P. in lower pay scale. They have further contended that the gradation list of AMOs | ||||
| 29 | Dr. Rajesh Joshi, AMO, AYUSH, (WP No. 3065/06) |
is defective. However, Department of AYUSH initially, refuted their claims and averred that it has yet to check/verify their claims in detail for which it sought further time. Since all these cases | ||||
| 30 | Dr. Vishambhar Dayal Chaturvedi, AMO, AYUSH, (WP No. 3905/07) |
are repeatedly being deferred for last three meetings, the Committee took serious note of it and recommended that the position be verified and checked within one month whether juniors have been given ACP with retrospective effect after the cut-off date i.e. 23.09 .2000 and reported to the Central Government with point-wise/specific comments on allocation of his juniors to M.P. Therefore, the Committee deferred these cases for its next meeting. | ||||
| 31 | Shri Bijendra Kumar Sharma, Sub-Engineer, Public Works WP No. 1496/05 |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 19.06.2013, the representation of Shri Sharma was considered by the Committee. Shri Sharma has contended that his junior viz. Shri Manoj Jain, Sub-Engineer was allocated to M.P. He has further contended that his wife Smt. Vijaylata Sharma is working as Shiksha Karmi Varg. I in Government Higher Secondary School, Distt. Shivpuri, M.P. However, Department of Public Works refuted his claim and submitted that his wife is not a government employee, she is samvida Karmi (contractual employee). The Administrative Department sought further time to check and verify allocation of his junior Shri Manoj Jain to M.P. by giving ACP with retrospective effect after the cut-off date i.e. 23.09.2000. In the light of above facts, the Committee recommended that the position be verified and checked within one month and reported to the Central Government with point-wise/specific comments on allocation of his junior. Therefore, the Committee deferred the case for its next meeting. | 32 | Shri Ashok Kumar Navre, Asstt. Grade-III, Public Works (Representation) |
The Administrative Department of Shri Navre 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 such non-State cadre employees were issued. Therefore, consideration of allocation of nonState cadre employee does not fall within the purview of Advisory Committee. As such, the Committee did not consider the representation of Shri Navre. However, the Committee, taking a sympathetic view, opined that his request may be considered by both the State Governments of M.P. and Chhattisgarh with mutual consent. | |
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 33 | Shri Sharad Kumar Cholkar, Asstt. Engineer, Public Works (Representation) |
The Central Government is in receipt of a representation from Shri Cholkar for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under SC/ST policy. However, his Administrative Department informed that no representation from Shri Cholkar for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. has been received so far. However, Government of M.P. sought further time to verify/check his service records. In the light of above facts, the Committee recommended revision of his allocation to M.P. subject to verification of the facts by Government of M.P. within two weeks. The Committee also desired that a copy of the representation be sent to his Administrative Department. However, after a lapse of one month, despite reminder, confirmation/verification has not been received so far from Government of M.P. Therefore, this case may be treated as deferred. . | ||||
| 34 | Shri Mahesh Pratap Singh, Sahayak Manchitrakar Public Works (Representation) |
The Administrative Department of Shri Singh 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 such non-State cadre employee were issued. Therefore, consideration of allocation of non-State cadre employee does not fall within the purview of the Committee. Since his son is mentally disturbed and physically handicapped and his wife is working in the State of M.P., in consultation with the Department of General Administration, Govt. of M.P., the Committee, taking a sympathetic view, opined that his request may be considered by both the State | Governments of M.P. and Chhattisgarh with mutual consent. | |||
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 35 | Shri Jageshwar Prasad Jaishwal, Constable (Ministerial) Home (WP No. 9491/13) | In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P dated 17.06.2013, the representation of Shri Jaiswal was considered by the Committee. Shri Jaiswal has contended that he was allocated to Chhattisgarh against option for M.P. He further contended that only those class IV employees were to be allocated to Chhattisgarh who had given option for the same. It was observed that there were inherent inconsistencies in the comments earlier made available by the Administrative Department. While the petitioner seems to have been Constable in the year 1988, his TFAL/FAL shows his allocation to Chhattisgarh against the post of Peon. The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Jaiswal was recruited as Constable (Ministerial) which is a class IV post. As per O.M. dated 5.11.1967 issued by Department of Home, M.P. the post Peon was deemed Constable (Ministerial). He was working against the post of Peon, deemed Constable (M), at the time of allocation. Therefore, he was allocated to Chhattisgarh under A-3 (home district- Bastar) category as Peon. The Committee considered these facts and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Jageshwar Prasad Jaiswal, Peon from Chhattisgarh to Madhya Pradesh under revised policy dated 02.11.2007 for allocation of Class IV employee as per option. | ||||
| 36 | Shri Bantalu Ram Bhagat, Platoon Commander, Home (Representation) |
Shri Bhagat has contended that he is a domicile/optee of Chhattisgarh. Government of Chhattisgarh has confirmed that Shri Bhagat is domicile/optee of Chhattisgarh. Govt. of M.P. as well as Govt. of Chhattisgarh has given no objection for revision of his allocation from M.P. to Chhattisgarh. However, Government of M.P. sought further time to verify and check the service records. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended revision of his allocation to Chhattisgarh subject to verification of the facts by Government of M.P. within two weeks. The Committee also desired that a copy of the representation be sent to his Administrative Department. However, after a lapse of one month, despite reminder, confirmation/verification has not been received so far from Government of M.P. Therefore, this case may be treated as deferred. | 37 | Shri Dubey Singh Marko, Constable (CID), Home (Representation) | The Administrative Department of Shri Marko confirmed that he belongs to ST category, is domicile of M.P. and had also opted for M.P. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered his representation and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Dubey Singh Marko, Constable from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised policy dated 24.06.2010 of allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to ST category and is domicile/optee of M.P. | |
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 38 | Shri Rakesh Jat, Constable, Home (Representation) | Shri Jat submitted a representation for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised policy for SC/ST employees. The Administrative Department in Govt. of Chhattisgarh has informed that Shri Jat has withdrawn his request for revision of allocation due to his promotion to the post of ASI in Chhattisgarh. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended to drop this case from agenda. | ||||
| 39 | Shri Thakur Prasad Markam, ASI, Home (Representation) | The Committee considered the representation of Shri Markam in the light of comments received from his Administrative Department. The Administrative Department having examined his representation admitted that he belong to SC/ST category, is domicile of M.P. and had also opted for M.P. However, Government of M.P. sought further time to verify and check the service records. In the light of above facts, the Committee recommended revision of his allocation to M.P. subject to verification of the facts by Government of M.P. within two weeks. The Committee also desired that a copy of the representation be sent to his Administrative Department. However, after a lapse of one month, despite reminder, confirmation/ verification has not been received so far from Government of M.P. Therefore, this case may be treated as deferred. | ||||
| 40 | Shri Bahadur Singh Choudhary, Constable (Radio), Home (Representation) | The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Bahadur Singh Choudhary and Shri Ratan Lal belong to SC/ST category, are domicile of M.P. and had opted for M.P. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered their representations and recommended revision of their allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised policy dated 24.06.2010 for | allocation of SC/ST employees as they belong to SC/ST category and are domicile/optee of M.P. | |||
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 42 | Shri Umesh Varma, Consable, Home (Representation) |
The Central Government is in receipt of a representation from Shri Varma for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under SC/ST policy. However, the Administrative Department of Shri Varma informed that no representation from Shri Varma for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. has been received so far. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended revision of his allocation to M.P. subject to verification of the facts by Government of M.P. within two weeks. The Committee also desired that a copy of the representation be sent to his Administrative Department. However, after a lapse of one month, despite reminder, confirmation/ verification has not been received so far from Government of M.P. Therefore, this case may be treated as deferred. | ||||
| 43 | Shri Sitaram Survanwanshi, Constable (Radio), Home (Representation) |
The Administrative Department of Shri Survanwanshi and Shri Ahirwar confirmed that they belong to SC/ST category, are domicile of M.P. and had opted for M.P. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considerd their representations and recommended revision of their allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised policy dated 24.06 .2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as they belong to SC/ST category and are domicile/optee of M.P. | ||||
| 44 | Shri Ganpat Ahirwar, Constable (Radio), Home (Representation) | The Central Government is in receipt of a representation from Shri Notia for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under SC/ST policy. However, the Administrative Department of Shri Notia informed that no representation from Shri Notia for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. has been received so far. In the light of above facts, the Committee recommended revision of his allocation to M.P. subject to verification of the facts by Government of M.P. within two weeks. The Committee also desired that a copy of the representation be sent to his Administrative Department. However, after a lapse of one month, despite reminder, confirmation/ verification has not been received so far from Government of M.P. Therefore, this case may be treated as deferred. | 46 | Shri Dulichand Maravi, Constable, Home (Representation) |
The Administrative Department of Shri Maravi confirmed that he belongs to SC/ST category, is domicile of M.P. and had also opted for M.P. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered his representation and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Dulichand Maravi, Constable from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised policy dated 24.06.2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to SC/ST category and is domicile/optee of M.P. | |
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 47 | Shri Girish Kumar Dhurve, Sub- Inspector, Home (Representation) |
The Central Government is in receipt of a representation from Shri Dhurve for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under SC/ST policy. However, the Administrative Department of Shri Dhurve informed that no representation from Shri Dhurve for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. has been received so far. In the light of above facts, the Committee recommended revision of his allocation to M.P. subject to verification of the facts by Government of M.P. within two weeks. The Committee also desired that a copy of the representation be sent to his Administrative Department. However, after a lapse of one month, despite reminder, confirmation/ verification has not been received so far from Government of M.P. Therefore, this case may be treated as deferred. | ||||
| 48 | Shri R.K. Sayre, Assistant Grade-II Animal Husbandry (Veterinary) (Representation) |
The Administrative Department of Shri Sayre informed that he is a non-state cadre employee. He belongs to SC category, is domicile of Nagpur, Maharashtra and had opted for Chhattisgarh. However, the Committee observed that he is a state cadre employee and was allocated to Chhattisgarh as per his option (A-2 category). In the light of above facts, the Committee considered his representation and recommended rejection of representation of Shri R.K. Sayre. Assistant Grade-II as he was allocated to Chhattisgarh as per his option. | ||||
| 49 | Shri Anil Kumar Sonare, Asstt. Grade-III/Steno Typist, Animal Husbandry (Veterinary) (Representation) |
The Administrative Department of Shri Sonare confirmed that he belongs to SC category, is domicile of Chhindwada, M.P. and had opted for Chhattisgarh. The Committee considered his representation and observed that Shri Sonare was allocated to Chhattisgarh as per his option (A-2 category). However, the Committee noted that issue of allocation of SC/ST employees to their domicile state is under consideration, in | consultation with the Department of Legal Affairs, Government of India as advised by Reservation Division of Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India. In the light of the above facts, the Committee deferred the case for its next meeting. | |||
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 50 | Shri Ashok Kumar Kurve, Asstt. Veterinary Field Officer, Animal Husbandry (Veterinary) (Representation) |
Shri Kurve has contended that he belongs to ST category and is domicile of M.P. His wife Smt. Anju is working as Assistant Teacher under State Government of M.P. The Administrative Department of Shri Kurve confirmed that he belongs to ST category, is domicile of Balaghat, M.P. and had opted for Chhattisgarh. The Committee observed that Shri Kurve was allocated to Chhattisgarh as per his option (A-2 category). However, the Committee noted that issue of allocation of SC/ST employees to their domicile state is under consideration, in consultation with the Department of Legal Affairs, Government of India as advised by Reservation Division of Department of Personnel and Training, Goverment of India. In the light of the above facts, the Committee deferred the case for its next meeting. | ||||
| 51 | Shri Anil Kumar Goyal, Asstt. Grade-III, Commerce and Industry (Representation) | The Administrative Department of Shri Goyal and Shri Garg confirmed that they belong to SC category, are domicile of M.P. and had also opted for M.P. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered their representations | ||||
| 52 | Shri Kedar Singh Garg, Asstt. Director, Commerce and Industry (Representation) |
and recommended revision of their allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised policy dated 24.06.2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as they belong to SC category and are domicile/optee of M.P. | ||||
| 53 | Shri Shivram Masram, Bhritya, Commerce and Industry, (Representation) |
The Administrative Department of Shri Masram confirmed that he belongs to ST category, is domicile of M.P. and had also opted for M.P. They have also confirmed that he is a class-IV employee. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered his representation and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Shivram Masram, Bhritya from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised policy dated 02.11.2007 for allocation of Class-IV employee to the opted State. | 54 | Shri Vijay Pal Singh Bhadoriya, Sub-Engineer, Public Health Engineering (WP No. 2672/05) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 14.03.2013, the representation of Shri Bhadoria was considered by the Committee. Shri Bhadoriya raised the ground of allocation of his juniors namely Shri B.P. Dubey, Shri P.K. Baijal, Shri D.K. Gupta, Shri M.K. Jain, Shri G.P. Dixit, Shri D.R. Choure, Shri R.K. Ahirwar, Shri I.M. Khan, Shri V.P. Malviya, Shri P.K. Pyasi, Shri P.K. Khare, Shri S.K. Chandryan, Shri K.C. Maheshwari, Shri S.A. Qureshi, Shri Ramji Tripathi, Shri V.K. Sharma, Shri R.K. Shrivastava, Shri S.K. Jasuja, Shri R.K. Pathak, Shri Y.K. Agrawal and Shri K.P. Kushwaha were allocated to the State of Madhya Pradesh. Shri Bhadoriya has further contended that his wife Smt. Anju Bhadoriya is working as Teacher in a Raman Girls Higher Secondary School, Bind, M.P. The Administrative Department informed that all the juniors named by Shri Bhadoriya were allocated to M.P. under either mutual transfer policy, revision of seniority or in reserved category. They were not allocated to M.P. under A-4 i.e. junior most category. Moreover, his wife is not a Govt. employee. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended rejection of representation of Shri Vijay Pal Singh Bhadoria, Sub-Engineer for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. A detailed speaking order shall be issued. | |
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 55 | Shri Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Sub-Engineer, Public Health Engineering, (WA No. 224/12) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 27.04.2012, the representation of Shri Sharma was considered by the Committee. Shri Sharma raised the ground of allocation of his juniors namely Shri Ghanshyam Agarwal, Shri Satish Prakash Sahu, Shri Kailash, Shri Krishna Gopal Maheshwari, Shri P K Saxena, Shri S A Qureshi, Shri Ram ji Tripathi, Shri V.K. Sharma, Shri R.K. Shrivastava, Shri R.K. Pathak, Shri Y.K. Agrawal and Shri K.P. Kushwaha were allocated to the State of Madhya Pradesh. The Administrative Department informed that all the juniors named by Shri Sharma were allocated to M.P. under either mutual transfer policy, revision of seniority or in reserved category. They were not allocated to M.P. under A-4 i.e. junior most category. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended rejection of representation of Shri Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Sub-Engineer for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. A detailed speaking order shall be issued. | 56 | Shri Dinesh Chandra Ojha, Sub-Engineer, Public Health Engineering (WA No. 367/11) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 18.10.2013, the representation of Shri Ojha was considered by the Committee. Shri Ojha raised the ground of allocation of his juniors namely Shri R.K. Ahirwar, Shri I.M. Khan, Shri K.C. Maheshwari, Shri Ghanshyam Aggarwal, Shri S.A. Qureshi, Shri Ramji Tripathi, Shri V.K. Sharma, Shri P K Saxena, Shri Krishna Gopal Maheshwari, Shri Satish Prakash Sahu, Shri Kailash Chandra Pashari Shri R.K. Shrivastava, Shri Y.K. Agrawal and Shri K.P. Kushwaha were allocated to the State of Madhya Pradesh. The Administrative Department informed that all the juniors named by Shri Ojha were allocated to M.P. under either mutual transfer policy, revision of seniority or in reserved category. They were not allocated to M.P. under A-4 i.e. junior most category. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended rejection of representation of Shri Dinesh Chandra Ojha, Sub-Engineer for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. A detailed speaking order shall be issued. | |
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 57 | Shri Pramod Kumar Chaturvedi, Sub-Engineer, Public Health Engineering (W P No. 3406/11) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 28.02.2011, the representation of Shri Chaturvedi was considered by the Committee. Shri Chaturvedi raised the ground of allocation of his juniors namely Shri Manoj Kumar Bhatnagar, Shri Utam Kumar Madankar to M.P. He further contended that Shri Yogesh Kumar Khare, Shri Jagdish Kumar Joshi and others have been left from allocation to Chhattisgarh and retained in State of M.P. The Administrative Department informed that Shri Manoj Kumar Bhatnagar and Shri Madankar are junior to Shri Chaturvedi. They were allocated to M.P. on the basis of wrong seniority rank. Seniority rank of Shri Bhatnagar was amended in 2011. Consequent upon amendment in seniority, he was placed below Shri Chaturvedi. However, Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Bhatnagar died in the year 2009. As regards Shri Madankar, they have clarified that seniority rank of Shri Madankar has also been re-determined. He has been placed at seniority rank No. 516 below Shri Chaturvedi (seniority rank No. 510). Shri Yogesh Kumar Khare was allocated to Chhattisgarh as per option and Shri J C Joshi was allocated to M.P. under mutual transfer policy. The Committee after perusing the facts explained by the Administrative Department as |
well as Departments of General Administration of Govt. of M.P. and Chhattisgarh, viewed that allocation of Shri Bhatnagar and Shri Madankar was not in order. Since Shri Bhatnagar died in the year 2009, the Committee recommended correction of the allocation of Shri Utam Kumar Madankar, Sub-Engineer by revising his allocation from M.P. to Chhattisgarh. After revising allocation of Shri Madankar to Chhattisgarh, the ground raised by Shri Pramod Kumar Chaturvedi would no longer sustain. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended rejection of representation of Shri Pramod Kumar Chaturvedi, Sub-Engineer for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. After issue of order for revision of allocation of Uttam Kumar Madankar, Sub-Engineer from M.P. to Chhattisgarh, a detailed speaking order shall be issued. | |||
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 58 | Shri Dinesh Babu Mishra, Sub-Engineer, Public Health Engineering (W P No. 2683/05) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 14.03.2013, the representation of Shri Mishra was considered by the Committee. Shri Mishra raised the ground of allocation of his juniors namely Shri B.P. Dubey, Shri P.K. Baijal, Shri D.K. Gupta, Shri M.K. Jain, Shri G.P. Dixit, Shri D.R. Choure, Shri R.K. Ahirwar, Shri I.M. Khan, Shri V.P. Malviya, Shri P.K. Pyasi, Shri P.K. Khare, Shri S.K. Chandryan, Shri K.G. Maheshwari, Shri S.A. Qureshi, Shri Ramji Tripathi, Shri V.K. Sharma, Shri R.K. Shrivastava, Shri S.K. Jasuja, Shri R.K. Pathak, Shri Y.K. Agrawal and Shri K.P. Kushwaha were allocated to the State of Madhya Pradesh. Shri Mishra further contended that six Sub-Engineers have not been given any category and have been skipped from allocation to Chhattisgarh. The Administrative Department informed that all the juniors named by Shri Mishra were allocated to M.P. under either mutual transfer policy, revision of seniority or in reserved category. They were not allocated to M.P. under A-4 i.e. junior most category. It has further been informed that Shri Mishra has not specifically mentioned the name of six Sub-Engineers who have not been given any category and have been skipped from allocation to Chhattisgarh. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended rejection of representation of Shri Dinesh Babu Mishra, Sub-Engineer for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. A detailed speaking order shall be issued. | 59 | Shri Lalit Gupta, Sub-Engineer, Public Health Engineering (W.P. No.1065/11) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 01.04.2011, the representation of Shri Gupta was considered by the Committee. The Administrative Department admitted that Shri Lalit Gupta is a handicapped employee and was also recruited under physically handicapped category. He is also receiving handicapped allowance. The Committee considered these facts and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Lalit Gupta, SubEngineer from Chhattisgarh to Madhya Pradesh on the ground that he is a handicapped employee and is eligible for allocation to M.P. as per his option. | |
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 60 | Shri Mukesh Kumar Nimje, Tracer, Public Health Engineering (Representation) |
The Administrative Department of Shri Nimje confirmed that he belongs to SC category, is domicile of M.P. and had also opted for M.P. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered his representation and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Mukesh Kumar Nimje, Tracer from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised policy dated 24.06.2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to SC category and is domicile/optee of M.P. | ||||
| 61 | Shri Deenanath Sirsant, Sub-Engineer, Panchayat and Rural Dev. (OA No. 3292/02) (WP No. 20505/03) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 15.09.2003, the representation of Shri Sirsant was considered by the Committee. The Administrative Department confirmed that home district of Shri Sirsant is Durg, Chhattisgarh and he had also opted for Chhattisgarh. Accordingly, Govt. of M.P. as well as Govt. of Chhattisgarh has given its no objection for revision of his allocation from M.P. to Chhattisgarh. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered his representation and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Deenanath Sirsant, Sub-Engineer from M.P. to Chhattisgarh. | ||||
| 62 | Shri Harish Dariyani, Assistant Grade-III, Panchayat and Rural Dev. (Representation) | The Administrative Department of Shri Dariyani confirmed that he is victim of Bhopal Gas Tragedy and has received a compensation of Rs. 50000/-. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered his representation and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Harish Dariyani, Assistant Grade-III from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under the policy for allocation of victims of Bhopal Gas Tragedy. | 63 | Shri Sukhdev Bisendre, Sub-Engineer, Panchayat and Rural Dev. (WP No. 20351/03) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 17.09.2003, the Committee considered the representation of Shri Bisendre. The Administrative Department of Shri Bisendre confirmed that he belongs to SC category, is domicile of Chhattisgarh and had also opted for Chhattisgarh. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended revision of allocation of Shri Sukhdev Bisendre, Sub-Engineer from M.P. to Chhattisgarh under revised policy dated 24.06.2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to SC category and is domicile/optee of Chhattisgarh. | |
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 64 | Shri Lakhan Lal Patel, Peon, Revenue (Land Records) (WP No.1145/09) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of Chhattisgarh dated 18.11.2009, representations of Shri Patel and Shri Khan were considered by the Committee. The Administrative Department in Government of M.P. informed that no such employee having name of Shri Lakhan Lal Patel, Peon is posted in Department of | ||||
| 65 | Shri Sharif Khan, Peon, Revenue (Land Records) (WP No.1145/09) |
Revenue/Land Records, Madhya Pradesh. They have further informed that Sh. Sharif Khan s/o Shri Lal Khan, Peon is posted in Office of Collector, Land Records, District Sidhi, M.P. However, Shri Khan has given an undertaking that he had never filed any court case or W.P. No. 1145/2009 and has been continuously posted in this office since 11.10.1994. It was observed by the Committee that Shri Lakhan Lal Patel s/o Shri Nathu Ram Patel and Shri Sharif Khan s/o Shri Abdul Gaffar Khan are posted in the Collectorate, Land Records, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended that the position be checked and verified by the Department of Revenue, Chhattisgarh as well as Department of General Administration, Chhattisgarh. After verifying the facts, the comments may be furnished to the Department of Revenue, M.P. and Department of General Administration, M.P. within one month for further verification and authentication. The Committee deferred these cases for its next meeting. | ||||
| 66 | Shri Dinesh Chand Malviya, Tracer, Revenue (Land Records) (Representation) |
The Administrative Department of Shri Malviya confirmed that he belongs to SC category, is domicile of M.P. and had also opted for M.P. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considered his representation and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Dinesh Chandra Malviya, Tracer from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised policy | dated 24.06.2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to SC category and is domicile/optee of M.P. | |||
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 67 | Smt. Manju Shukla, Project Officer, Woman \& Development (WP No. 24/09) Child This case was placed before the Committee to consider the applicability of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur dated 03.09.2013. Whereby the Hon’ble Court had quashed the order dated 08.08 .2002 allocating Smt. Manju Shukla to the Chhattisgarh as well as order dated $05 / 13.01 .2005$ passed by Central Government rejecting the representation of Smt. Shukla. It was observed that Smt. Shukla was allocated to Chhattisgarh as per her option. Later on, she changed her option to Madhya Pradesh and requested for her allocation to M.P. as per changed option under the policy for allocation of women employees. But her request was rejected vide order dated $05 / 13.01 .2005$ by the Central Government. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended that appeal against the order dated 03.09 .2013 be filed by the State Government as well as by the Central Government. |
This case was placed before the Committee to consider the applicability of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur dated 03.09.2013. Whereby the Hon’ble Court had quashed the order dated 08.08 .2002 allocating Smt. Manju Shukla to the Chhattisgarh as well as order dated $05 / 13.01 .2005$ passed by Central Government rejecting the representation of Smt. Shukla. It was observed that Smt. Shukla was allocated to Chhattisgarh as per her option. Later on, she changed her option to Madhya Pradesh and requested for her allocation to M.P. as per changed option under the policy for allocation of women employees. But her request was rejected vide order dated $05 / 13.01 .2005$ by the Central Government. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended that appeal against the order dated 03.09.2013 be filed by the State Government as well as by the Central Government. | ||||
| 68 | Shri Trilok Chand Gupta, Panchayat and Social Education Organizer Panchayat /Social Welfare (WP No.769/05) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 05.05.2011, representation of Shri Gupta was considered by the Committee. Department of General Administration, Govt. of M.P. informed that Department of Social Welfare only existed at the time of allocation, which had further been bifurcated as Panchayat Vibhag and Samaj Kalyan Vibhag after State Reorganization. Therefore, it was not possible to trace service records of Shri Gupta. However, Department of Panchayat, M.P. informed that Shri Gupta is working in the state of M.P. in compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 05.05.2011. Shri Gupta has contended in his representation that 23 juniors to him were allocated to M.P. in lower pay scale by not giving ACP. But they were given benefit of ACP on 19.12.2002 with retrospective effect i.e. 19.04.1999. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended that the position be verified and checked whether juniors have been given ACP with retrospective effect after the cut-off date i.e. 23.09 .2000 and reported to the Central Government with detailed/specific comments on allocation of his juniors to M.P. The Committee deferred the case for its next meeting. | 69 | Shri Anil Kumar Mishra, Fisheries Inspector Fisheries (WA No.495/12) |
In compliance of directions of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. dated 31.08.2012, the representation of Shri Mishra was considered by the Committee. The Administrative Department admitted that Shri Mishra’s juniors viz. Shri Dinesh Pathak, Shri Om Prakash Sharma and Shri Sanjay Inamdar were given higher pay scale under ACP scheme, with retrospective effect, i.e. effective before 23.09 .2000 but were allocated to M.P. in lower pay scale. The Committee considered these facts and recommended revision of allocation of Shri Anil Kumar Mishra, Fisheries Inspector from Chhattisgarh to Madhya Pradesh on the ground that his juniors were allocated to M.P. | |
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 70 | Shri Chandra Kishor Baghel, Assistant Director, Employment \& Training (Representation) |
The Central Government is in receipt of a representation from Shri Baghel for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under SC/ST policy. The Department of Employment and Training, Govt. of M.P. has informed that they have not received any representation from Shri Baghel so far. However, Government of Chhattisgarh has given its no objection for allocation of Shri Baghel to Madhya Pradesh. The Committee recommended revision of his allocation to M.P. subject to verification of the facts by Government of M.P. within two weeks. The Committee also desired that a copy of the representation be sent to his Administrative Department. However, after a lapse of one month, confirmation/ verification has not been received from Government of M.P. despite reminder. Therefore, this case may be treated as deferred. | ||||
| 71 | Shri P.L. Kemiya, Inspector, Weight \& Measurement, (Representation) |
The Administrative Departments of Shri Kemiya and Shri Bundela confirmed that they belong to SC/ST category, are domicile of M.P. and had also opted for M.P. In the light of the above facts, the Committee considred their representations and recommended revision of their allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised policy dated 24.06 .2010 for allocation of SC/ST employees as they belong to SC/ST category and are domicile/optee of M.P. | 73 | Shri Rajendra Kumar Shilpkar, UDC, Housing \& Environment, (Representation) |
The Central Government is in receipt of a representation from Shri Shilpkar for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under SC/ST policy. The Administrative Department of Shri Shilpkar informed that no representation from Shri Shilpkar for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. has been received so far. The Committee recommended revision of his allocation to M.P. subject to verification of the facts by Government of M.P. within two weeks. The Committee also desired that a copy of the representation be sent to his Administrative Department. However, after a lapse of one month, confirmation/ verification has not been received from Government of M.P. despite reminder. Therefore, this case may be treated as deferred. |
|
| :–: | :–: | :–: | ||||
| 74 | Shri Munna Lal Ahirwar, Principal, School Education (Representation) |
The Administrative Department informed that Shri Munna Lal Ahirwar stood retired on 30.09.2012 from the post of Asstt. Director, Planning, Office of Joint Director, Lok Shikshan Sanchalanya, Sagar, M.P. In the light of the above facts, the Committee recommended to drop this case from the agenda. |
||||
| 75 | Mohammad Tarik Ali Khan, Asstt. Grade-III, Technical Education (Representation) |
The Administrative Department of Mohammad Tarik Ali Khan 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 such non-State cadre employee were issued. Therefore, consideration of allocation of non-State cadre employee does not fall within the purview of State Advisory Committee. As such, the Committee did not consider the representation. Since Shri Khan is a victim of Bhopal Gas Tragedy and physically handicapped, the Committee, taking a sympathetic view, opined that his request may be considered by both the State Governments of M.P. and Chhattisgarh with mutual consent. |
76 | Shri Prakash Narayan Prajapati, Sub-Engineer, PWD (Representation) |
The Administrative Departments of the applicants have informed that they have not yet received representations of these employees. Taking note of the above, the Committee recommended that copies of representations be sent to their Administrative Departments in Govt. of M.P. as well as Govt. of Chhattisgarh for furnishing their comments. The Committee deferred these cases for its next meeting. |
|
| :– | :– | :– |
The meeting ended with a vote of thanks to the chair.# LIST OF ATTENDEES
- Ms. Archana Verma, Joint Secretary, Government of India, New Delhi Chairperson, Advisory Committee, M.P.
- Shri K. Suresh, Principal Secretary, Department of General Administration, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Ms. K. Kipgen, Director (SRS), DOPT, Govt. of India, New Delhi.
- Shri Manu Vyas, AIG (Personal), Department of Home (Police), Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Shri G R Churendra, Deputy Secretary, Department of General Administration, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Raipur.
- Shri R. S. Gohal, Under Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Shri Dinesh, Section Officer, SR-I, DOPT, Govt. of India, New Delhi.
- Dr. Arvind Chaturvedi, Asstt. Director, Veterinary Services, Deptt of Animal Husbandry, Govt of M.P., Bhopal.
- Smt. Bharti Gawade, Under Secretary, Department of Farmers’ Welfare \& Agriculture Development, Govt. of M.P., Bhopal.
- Shri P K Thakur, Deputy Secretary, Department of Public Health Engineering, Govt of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.
- Shri Rajendra K. Hirodiya, SE (Admin.), Department of Public Health Engineering, Govt of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.
- Shri D.P. Agraiya, Under Secretary, Commerce and Industry, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Smt. Kamla Upadhyay, Under Secretary, Department of Home, Government of M.P., Bhopal, M.P.
- Dr. Ghani Ahmed Khan, Under Secretary, Department of Public Health \& Family Welfare, Govt of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.
- Shri H K Khare, Deputy Director, Department of Fisheries, Govt of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.
- Shri H.N. Ahirwar, DSP Radio, Department of Home (Police Telecom), Govt of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.
- Shri G D Lalwa, Under Secretary, Department of Panchayat, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Smt. Kusum Thakur, Deputy Secretary, Department of Cottage and Rural Industries, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Smt. Seema Jain, Asstt. Director, Directorate of Sericulture, Department of Cottage and Rural Industries, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.20. Shri P K Singhal, Department of Horticulture, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Dr. S.G. Ishtiaq, Deputy Director, Deptt of AYUSH, Govt of M.P., Bhopal.
- Shri K K Dwivedi, Directorate of School Education, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Shri M.K. Shukla, S.E. (Admin), Department of Public Works, Govt of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal.
- Shri Ashok Kumar Malviya, Under Secretary, Department of Housing and Environment, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Shri M L Karyam, Deputy Secretary, Department of Women \& Child Development, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Shri R C Shukla, Deputy Director, Department of Women \& Child Development, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Shri B.K. Chandel, Deputy Secretary, Department of Food, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Shri K K Bhavsar, Joint Controller, Weight \& Measurement, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Smt. Kamla Ajitwar, Under Secretary, Department of Revenue, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Shri Ramesh Patoda, Deputy Manager, School Education, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Shri M K Dhakad, Research Officer, Department of Technical Education, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Dr. S S K Naidu, Deputy Director, Department of Commerce Industry, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Shri A P Singh, Department of Home (Police), Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Shri P K Srivastav, Asstt. Engineer, Department of Water Resources, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Smt. Shobha Nikunj, Section Officer, Department of Horticulture, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.
- Shri Ravindra Potar, Department of Civil Supply, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal, M.P.