/ mm m¥fga 11w $31 gwftm? WWW, mamrrzrg? 3g. u. g w wy q>gs75r 3 o Ere /2 002 :- WWW: ammi 3{T§- 3e mi am— :“fr Wm 21m1$3 3H‘E’qi? Wm fREW—Wzr qw‘wf’m ENaT, ‘WT—am jgwn g fa 3m1%rw :— WW? 3mm, wr aw wf’aa, W%”r W 7%:54111, g’iKk‘e‘a- ma, ?mgir ggmx 2. a’am, WWW W a‘amma, Irfgar wwwrii, §W mare“, 3- Efraréf, Mir WWW, @‘Ear ‘Fkmr—a"?rwr gamg 3§$W 31W mTLI 9 mm Ifcm "317m WWW mmg W M‘WW; w¢N W a A S.B.: HON’BLE JUSTICE MR. PR TINKER DIWAKER 06-12-2010: Shri S.K. Thomas counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vaibhav Goverdhan PL or the respondents. Case of the petitioner is tha on 11.5.1991 he was appointed as workshop instructor on ad hoc asis and he continued as such till his regularization in the year 1994. Petitioner’s further case is that he has been deprived of getting re uiar increments for the ad hoc period. ' Counsel for the petitioner ubrnits that his case is squarely covered with the decision of M.P. tate Administrative Tribunal in the matter of Dr. P.L. Ma/ik v. State f MP. and others, 1992 MPLSR 475 and pursuant to the said de ision the then State of Madhya Pradesh had also issued a circula dated 18.8.1993 (Annexure A—3) making it clear that the ad hoc employees are-also entitled for the annual increment. He submits that a direction may be issued to the State Government to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the decision in the matter of Dr. P.L. Malik (supra) and the subsequent circular of the then State of Madhya Pradesh and pass appropriate order within some stipulated period. s {r{§\t711‘ mm w..E......Q........5 S/ Cu