(b BEFORE THE M.P. STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BENCH RAIPUR o.A. N0- 7 /2601 éL?ryO/éj' M73 30/ ’1‘, y APPLICANT : SMT. SUCHITRA SHARMA Asstt. Professor Dept. of Sociology Govt. College Vaishalinagar, Bhilai, Distt. Durg (C.G.) VERSUS NON—APPLICANT : l. State of M.P. through the Secretary Department of Higher EducatiOn'Govt. of M.P. Vallabh Bhawan Bhopal (M.P. ) 2. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary Department of Higher Education D.K.S. Bhavan Raipur (C.G.) 3. The Commissioner Higher Education Govt. of M.P. Satpuda Bhawan, Bhopal (M.P.) 4. The Commissioner Higher Education 'Govt. of Chhattisgarh D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur Chhattisgarh 5. The Principal, Govt. College, Vaishalinagar Bhilai, Distt. Durg (CJG.) ORIGINAL APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE M.P. STATE AnMTNTsTRATTVR TPTRHMAL AFT 1qnn HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH z BILASPUR 7W SINGLE BENCH : HON’BLE SHRI MANINDRA MOI-IAN SHRIVASTAVA,J. Writ Petition (S) No. 4020/2005 . The question which arises for consideration before this Court is that whether the petitioner could be deprived of increments in respect of the period during she worked on ad hoc basis. . On 30.10. 1981, petitioner was appointed as Assistant Professor on ad— hoc basis in the pay—scale of Rs.700-1600/-. Later on petitioner’s services were regularized on 17.3.1987. However, petitioner was not granted increments since her initial date of appointment till the date of s her regularization. . Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that this issue is no longer res integra. The matter relating to entitlement of increment of an ad hoc employee, appointed on a pay-scale, was earlier decided‘ by the State Administrative Tribunal, which has been implemented by the Government. PETITIONER Smt. Suchitra Sharma Versus RESPONDENTS State of M.P. and others Appearance: Shri Manish Sharma, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Chandresh Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents No. 2, 4 85 5’ ORAL-ORDER (Passed on 5.5.2010) j str Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to Circuiar dated 18th Augu 1993 (Annexure A—3), whereby the State Government in View of the order passed by the Tribunal in the case of Dr. P.L. Malik Vs. State of M.P. [1991 M.P.L.S.R. 475), directed that increments would be -3), d be available only when the artiiicial break is for a period of 3 days. It benefits of increments in respect of the ad hoc period of service woul has also been submitted that Vide Circular dated 19.4.1996 (Annexure R-2) , a‘direction has been issued that implementation of Circular dated 22.7.1993 has been stayed until further directions by the General Administrative Department. Therefore, petitioner is not entitled to payment of increments. 6. The issue with rgard to grant of increment n respect of ad hoc period of service having been decided by the Tribunal, it is not open for the Government to apply it selectively r to deny grant of benefit to the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court, the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the orders which have been placed on record by the petitioner. The Tribunal in the past has ordered for grant of increments to Assistant Proessors'appointed on ad hoc basis in number of cases relying upon he order passed in he case of Dr. P.L. t t Malik (supra). The aw otherwe is also very well settled that once an appointment has been ma on a time scale of pay, in the absence of there being anything contra to the same, eithe in the order of appointment r in the statutory rules governing such terms and conditions, in view of the provision contained in FR. 9(13) of the Fundamental Rules, increments ar liable t be paid an the same could be hheld only by way of penay on an allegation of misconduct. . Viewed from any angle, the action of the spondent in withholding payment of increments in respect o the period of ad hoc service is not justified. x . In the result, he petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to pay increments to the petitioner; in respect of the period of ad hoc service. 9. No order as costs. Sd/- . Manihplra Mohan Shrivastava it .Vgtluda Praveen e i o f l is de ry r o e o d wit lt res f t e