F. No. 14/3/2006-SR(S)-Vol.-VI Government of India Ministry of Personnel; Public Grievances & Pensions (Department of Personnel & Training) ***

Transcription

1 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 rd Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi-l10003, Dated: 9 th October, 2015 To The Principal Secretary, Department of General Administration, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal (M.P.). The Secretary, Department of General Administration, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur (Chhattisgarh). SUbject: -Minutes of 26 th meeting of the Advisory Committee, M.P. Sir, I am directed to forward herewith the minutes of 26 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. EncIs.: As above 1,--._.~. i ; [ f ~'!., c:, ;~.:' ~ I ~ 2015 rl:j ~

2 ,.- Copyto:- 1. The Principal Secretary, Department of Public Health and Family Welfare, Govt.. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal The Principal Secretary, Department of Public Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Principal Secretary, Department of Ayush, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal The Principal Secretary, Department of Health & Ayush, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Principal Secretary, Department of Public Works, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal The Principal Secretary, Department of Public Works, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue (Land Records), Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue (Land Records), Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Principal Secretary, Department of SC & ST Welfare, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal The Principal Secretary, Department of Tribal Welfare, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Principal Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal The Principal Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Principal Secretary, Department of Public Health Engineering, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal The Principal Secretary, Department of Public Health Engineering, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Principal Secretary, Department of Horticulture, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal The Principal Secretary, Department of Horticulture, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Principal Secretary, Department of Farmers' Welfare and Agriculture Development, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal The Principal Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Principal Secretary, Department of Commercial Tax, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal The Principal Secretary, Department of Commercial Tax, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Principal Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry (Veterinary), Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal The Principal Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry (Veterinary), Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Principal Secretary, Department of Women and Child Development, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal The Principal Secretary, Department of Women and Child Development, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3 27. The Principal Secretary, Department of Commerce and Industry, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal The Principal Secretary, Department of Commerce and Industry, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Principal Secretary, Department of Technical Education, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal The Principal Secretary, Department of Technical Education, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Principal Secretary, Department of School Education, Govt. of M.P., Vallabh Bhavan, Mantralaya, Bhopal The Principal Secretary, Department of School Education, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4 Minutes of 26 th meeting of Advisory Committee, M.P. 26 th meeting of Advisory Committee, M.P. was held by circulation of agenda to the following» i. Ms. Archana Varma, Joint Secretary (AV), ii. iii. iv. DoPT, Government of India Shri K. Suresh, Principal Secretary, D/o General Administration, Government of M.P. Shri D.D. Singh, Special Secretary D/o General Administration, Government of Chhattisgarh Ms. K. Kipgen, Director (SR), DoPT, Government of India - Chairperson. -Member -Member - Member. 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.lChhattisgarh with their mutual consent so that an amicable decision 1

5 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 II 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 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. 2

6 4. 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. 5. 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 holisticllogical view could be taken on them. 6. As regards representations for revision of State allocation, the Committee considered 77 cases in total. Details are given below: Total No. of No. of cases No. of No. of No. of cases No. of No. cases recommended for cases cases deferred cases of consid acceptance recommend recommen deferred cases ered ed for ded to for want rejection drop of comments !Agenda Item Nos. - Agenda Agenda Agenda Item Agenda 8,9,13,15,16,17, Item Nos.- Item Nos.- Nos.- 1,3 to Item 18,21,23,28,30,31, 19,26,27, 2,20,22, 7, to, 11, 12, Nos.- 29, 33,35,37,38,46,47, 39 to 43, 24,36,49, 14, 25, 32, 34, 45,48,51, )2 to 58, 64 to 68, 72, 62,73,77, 50 & ,59,60,61, 63 & 71 ~4,75, 76 & & 82 69,70,80 & 83. 3

7 7. Recommendations of the Committee in each individual case are reflected in the following table: Sr. Agen Name, Designation, Recommendations of the Advisory Committee No. da Department and item W.P.IW.A. No. No. 1. Dr. Ramesh Kumar Neema, Medical Specialist, 0/0 Public Health & Family Welfare (W.P. No. 1836/2007) In compliance of directions dated II passed in W.P. No 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 but were allocated to M.P. in the pay scale of Rs (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 but were allocated to M.P. Administrative Department did not clarified retention of doctors junior to Dr. Neema in M.P. and grant of ACP to above juniors with retrospective effect prior tolon , 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 He is due for retirement on 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 4

8 ,. both the State Governments should arrive at a practical solution/decision. The Committee noted that Department of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of Chhattisgarh has conveyed its consent on retaining of doctors/employees going 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.ofM.P Shri Ram Kumar Jatav, Health Supervisor, D/o Public Health & Family Welfare In view of the above, the Committee desires that the views of the Directorate of Health, M.P. for taking appropriate decision regarding compliance of Court's directions in the light of shortage of Specialist doctors in M.P. 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 exce~ion. The Administrative Department of Shri Jatav 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 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 dr~ed from the agenda. 5

9 3. 3 Dr. Pramod Kumar Dube, The Administrative Department informed that Medical Officer, 0/0 Public Health & Family Welfare legal opinion for filing appeals has been sought from the State Govt. Counsel which is yet to be received. (W.P. No. 2398/2007) 4. 4 Dr. Ashok Kumar Dixit, The Committee noted that this may be Medical Specialist, vigorously pursued and it may be kept apprised of 0/0 Public Health & the present status as well as subsequent Family Welfare development. (W.P. No ) 5. 5 Dr. Krishna Kumar The Administrative Department further informed Bhargav, Child Specialist, that all these doctors have already attained the age 0/0 Public Health & of 60 years or about to attain the age of 60 years. Family Welfare However they will retire on superannuation on (W.P. No. 1086/2005) attaining the age of 65 years. Administrative ~--~--r=--=-=-~------~--~ 6. 7 Dr. R. P. Srivastava, Department further opined that appropriate decision Medical specialist, % in compliance of Court's direction in the light Public Health & Family Welfare W.P. No 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 6

10 7. 6 Shri Bhaiyaram Bhagat, MPW(M) 0/0 Public Health & Family Welfare W. P. No. 4043/2005 keeping in view its implicationslramifications, if any, and a concrete proposal should be formulatedlsubmitted 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 orderslcontempt. As seen from the website of the Hon'ble High Court, the writ petition appears to be disposed of on 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 and comments of the Administrative Department, no decision could be arrived at Dr. Kailash Chandra Mahajan, AMO, D/oAYUSH W. P. No. 6775/ Dr. Kunwar Pal Singh, AMO, Dlo AYUSH W. P. No. 6774/ Dr. Rajesh Joshi, AMO, 0/0 AYUSH W. P. No. 3065/2006 The Committee desired that a copy of the order dated 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. The Administrative Department confirmed that Dr. Mahajan retired on and Dr. Singh retired on on superannuation. In the light of the above confirmationlfacts, the Committee recommended that necessary action would be taken in accordance with guidelines dated with regard to dead/retired employee issued by the Central Government. The Department of Ayush informed date of retirement as under: Dr. Rajesh Joshi :----:----1 Dr. Vishambhar Dayal Chaturvedi Dr. Vishambhar Dayal Dr. Devendra Pratap Singh Sengar Chaturvedi, AMO, Dr. Vishnu Dutt Mishra /0 AYUSH W. P. No. 3905/2007 7

11 Dr. Devendra Pratap Singh The Committee noted that the Department of Sengar, AMO, Ayush is of view to retain these Ayurvedic Medical 0/0 AYUSH Officers (AMOs) who have not joined the State of W. P. No. 3793/2008 Chhattisgarh in compliance of Court's order and Dr. Vishnu Dutt Mishra, still working in the State of M.P. Due to shortage of AMO, % AYUSH AMOs in M.P., they are proposed to have been W. P. No 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 Dr. Awadh Bihari Sharma, The Administrative Department confirmed all AMO, % AYUSH, these Ayurvedic Medical Officers retired on t-:-::-if-:--::---1r-:w=--a-=-:-n_o:-. _1:-34:-/-:2_0:-11-:--: ---1 superann uation on the dates mentioned against their Dr. Kedar Nath Mishra, names as under: AMO, % AYUSH t-:-::-if-:--:=--~--:~:--:--:~_:_~----~ W. P. No. 1037/2006 Dr. Awadh Bihari Sharma Dr. Mehtab Singh Kaurav, Dr. Kedar Nath Mishra AMO, % AYUSH, Dr. Mehtab Singh Kaurav f-:-:::-t--=-=:-+=-w~a~n-:-:o:..:-..=.2.:..,:53::::/:;:-20.:..,:1:...:1-=-_:---1 Dr. Krishan Kumar Saraiya Dr. Krishan Kumar Saraiya, Dr. Aditya Narayan Bajpayee AMO, % AYUSH, WP No. 4244/2008 In the light of above confirmation/facts, the Dr. Aditya Narayan Committee recommended that necessary action Bajpayee, AMO, 0/0 would be taken in accordance with guidelines dated AYUSH, with regard to dead/retired employee WP No. 5390/2005 issued by the Central Government. 8 I ~

12 Shri Bijendra Kumar Sharma, Sub-Engineer, 0/0 Public Works, W. P. No. 1496/2005 In compliance of directions dated 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 Shri Anand Kumar Mishra, Sub-Engineer, 0/0 Public Works, W. P. No. 1489/2005 In the light of above facts, the Committee recommended rejection of representation of Shri Sharma. A speaking order shall be issued accordingly. This case has been deferred since 23r<1 meeting of the Committee r.e for want of information from the concerned Department. Earlier, the Administrative Department had submitted that appeal is being preferred challenging the order dated 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. 9

13 Shri Rajveer Singh Bhadoriya, Sub-Engineer, 0/0 Public Works, (W. P. No. 396/2006) Shri Umesh Varma, Constable, 0/0 Home Shri Gehru Singh Dhurve, Constable, 0/0 Home Shri Gulab Singh Gahlot, Head Constable, 0/0 Home The Administrative department of the petitioner informed that Shri Bhadoriya died of heart attack on In the light of above, the Committee recommended that necessary action may be taken in accordance with guidelines dated with regard to dead/retired employee issued by the Central Government. 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 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. 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 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to ST category and is domicile/~tee of M.P. 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 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. 10

14 Shri Jitendra Singh Chauhan, Company Commander, D/o Home, WA No. 400/2011 While disposing of the Writ Appeal on , 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 Shri Brij Kishor Dharvan, They have submitted their representations for Head Constable (Radio), revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to Madhya 0/0 Home Pradesh stating that they had opted for the State of (R~esentation) M.P. but were allocated to Chhattisgarh against Shri Aditya Kumar their option. Their seniority was not fixed as per Sharma, Constable existing rules of State Government. Therefore, they (Radio), % Home became junior and accordingly allocated to Chhattisgarh on juniority basis. They are facing financial, mental and family related problems. 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. 11

15 Shri Braham Dev Pachauri, Head Constable (Radio Operator), D/oHome W.P. No. 437/ Shri Shivendra Upadhyay, Constable, D/o Home, W.P. No. 1423/2009 The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Pachauri retired on on superannuation. In the light of above facts, the Committee recommended that necessary action would be taken in accordance with guidelines dated with regard to dead/retired employee issued by the Central Government. As seen from the website ofhon'ble High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur, the writ petition filed by the petition appears to have been disposed of on with disposal remarks "infructuous" Shri Munnalal Karade, A.S.I., 0/0 Home 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 passed by the Court, representation of petitioner and comments thereon. The Committee noted that a certified copy of order dated 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. The Administrative Department confirmed that they belong to SC category, are domicile/optee of Madhya Pradesh and are employees of State cadre Shri Balram Singh In the light of the above facts, the Committee Baghel, S.1. (Radio), considered their representations and recommended D/o Home revision of allocation of Shri Karade, Shri Bhaghel l l~(~R.;;.:eL..:..Plre:..=s..:c..en:..=t:;.:.:a~ti-=-on:.::..I)~---_I and Shri Ahirwar from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under Shri Inder Lal Ahirwar, revised guidelines dated for allocation Subedar, of SC/ST employees as they belong to SC category 010 Home, and are domicile/optee of M.P Shri Rajkumar Sharma, Constable (Radio), D/o Home, 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 12

16 Shri Shivakant Constable D/o Tiwari, (GO), Home, 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 ofshri 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. 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 Shri Rajeev Thakur, S.1. (Radio), 0/0 Home, 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. 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. 13

17 Shri Shivaji Kunjam, Head Constable (Radio), 0/0 Home, Shri Govind Markam, Head Constable, Dlo Home,. Singh Shri Jawahar Lal Sisodia, S.1. (Executive), 0/0 Home, 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 for allocation ofsc/st employees as they belong to ST category and are domicile/optee of M.P. 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 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. The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Sisodia belongs to SC category, is domicile/optee of Madhya Pradesh and is employees of State cadre Shri Bachchan Singh, Constable, 0/0 Home, 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 for allocation ofsc/st employees as he belongs to SC category and is domicile/optee of M.P. 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.

18 Shri Devendra Prasad Rai, A.S.I., % Home, 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 Chhatti~arh to M.P. 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 Shri Azad Mohammad Qureshi, A.S.I., 0/0 Home 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. 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. 15

19 Shri Hamir Singh, Constable, 0/0 Home, 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 Chhattisaarh to M.P 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 Shri Niranjan Vishwakarma, A.S.1. (Radio), DloHome In the light of above, the Committee noted that family circumstances and mere optionsl 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. 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 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. 16

20 Shri Arun Kumar Tripathi, Head Constable (Radio Operator), 0/0 Home, W A No Therefore, the Committee recommended rejection of his representation for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. While passing the directions dated 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 The Committee recommended to file a writ appeal against the above said judgment dated Accordingly, the State Government preferred an appeal challenging the above order dated The Administrative Department informed that writ appeal No. 428/2012 preferred by the State Government was dismissed by the Hon'ble Court on for being time barred Shri Shivcharan Singh Parihar, Subedar, D/oHome W P. No /2010 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. GADI Admin Department may also seek legal opinion and place the matter before the Central Government, for further course of action. While disposing of W.P. No /2010 on , 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 17

21 of writ petition, representation of petitioner and comments thereon. The Committee instructed that a certified copy of order dated and W. P /2010 be obtained from the Hon'ble Court by the Administrative Department and furnished to Central Government alongwith representation and comments thereon for further examination Shri Lokram Kakoriya, Constable, D/o Home Shri Santosh Kumar Purniya, Constable, D/oHome, Shri Mazhar Khan, Head Constable, 0/0 Home, In the light of above, the Committee deferred the matter for its next meeting. 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 for allocation ofsc/st employees as he belongs to ST category and is domicile/optee of M.P. 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 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to SC category and is domicile/optee of M.P. 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 Shri Lakhan Lal Patel, In compliance of directions dated of I-----<I--_t-P_e:-'o-:-n-::-, -:-O_/o--:-::-R_e_v...;,..en...;,..u--c:e -l Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh, Shri Patel and Shri Sharif Khan, Peon, Shri Khan submitted their representations for D/o Revenue revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. W. P. No. 1145/2009 They contended that they are class IV employee and 18

22 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 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 0/0 Commissioner Land Records, Chhattisgarh Shri Sanjay Kumar Godale, Principal, 0/0 Tribal Welfare 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 is to be complied with. Shri Godale submitted a representation for revision of allocation from Chhattisgarh to M.P. under revised policy dated for SC/ST employee. He belongs to SC category and is domicileloptee 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 to furnish their comments to Central Government Shri Mahesh Kumar Pandey, BOO, 0/0 SC&ST Welfare W A No. 728/2010 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.lGAD and furnished to the Central Govt. The Committee deferred the matter for its next meeting This case was placed before the advisory committee in its 15 th meeting held on in compliance of direction dated passed in WP No. 956/2005. The Hon'ble Court held that the petitioner has raised a genuine ground about his 19

23 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 challenging the order dated has been rejected by the Hon'ble Court for being barred by limitations vide its order dated ] Shri T. S. Chakradhari, Sub-Engineer, 0/0 Water Resources In the light of submission of Administrative Department, in compliance of court's direction dated ] , the Committee recommended revision of allocation of Shri Mahesh Kumar Pandey, BOO from Chhattisgarh to M.P. because his junior Shri Raj Kumar Joshi has been allocated to M.P. 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 ] 0 for allocation of SC/ST employees as he belongs to SC category and is domicile/optee of M.P. 20

24 Shri Rameshwar Dayal Gaur, Sub-Engineer, D/o Water Resources The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Gaur retired on and Shri Sankhla retired on on superannuation. W.A. No. 712/2008 In the light of above facts, the Committee 1--~f-~-=R:..:..=..P-=N...:...o:...:...::2:...:..7..:..0/:...:2:..:0..:..0.:: j recommended that necessary action would be taken Shri Bhagat Singh Sankhla, in accordance with guidelines dated Sub-Engineer, with regard to dead/retired employee issued by the D/o Water Resources Central Government. W P No. 1958/ Shri Mukul Jain, In compliance of directions dated of Asstt. Engineer, Hon'ble High Court of M.P. the representation of D/o Water Resources Shri Mukul Jain was considered by the Advisory W P No. 1907/2009 Committee in its meeting held on 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 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 to1710. In view of revision of his seniority rank, Shri Jain was promoted to the post of Executi ve Engineer vide order dated 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 of Hon'ble High Court of M.P., the Committee considered the representation and recommended 21

25 revision of allocation of Shri Jain from Chhattisgarh to M.P Shri Devendra Kumar Sharma, Sub-Engineer, 0/0 Water Resources W P No Shri C. D. Thakre, Asstt. Engineer, 0/0 Water Resources, W.P. 7734/ Shri Narendra Kumar Gupta, Asstt. Engineer, 0/0 Water Resources WP No. 3821/2005 The Administrative Department confirmed that Shri Shrama retired on on superannuation. In the light of above facts, the Committee recommended that necessary action would be taken in accordance with guidelines dated with regard to deadlretired employee issued by the Central Government. The Administrative Department has informed that seniority rank of Shri Thakre was amended from 1844 to In view of revision of his seniority rank, Shri Thakre was promoted to the post of Executive Engineer vide order dated 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 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. In compliance of directions dated of Hon'ble High Court of M.P. the representation of Shri Gupta was considered by the Advisory Committee in its meeting held on 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." 22