Brajendra Kumar Soni and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
service - hearing of grievances - petitioners were employees of madhya pradesh - chhattisgarh was divided from madhya pradesh - allocation of employees was done and committee was appointed for hearing grievances of employees - allegation of petitioners was that they made representation to committee but representation filed by petitioner were not properly considered - hence, present petition - held, partition gives pain to every affected person - if employee has to go to another state without his willingness or he is having some genuine grounds to remain in state of his choice, then his grievance is to be considered fairly and properly - so, duty is cast on central government to consider grievance of petitioners properly - petition disposed of with certain directions - - under the facts and circumstances this court would like to observe that power of central government is not exhausted merely by laying down criteria for final allotment but continues till entire process is completed, all problems, doubts resolved and all representations considered. 24. in the opinion of this court, it is in the interest of the employees as well as the respective governments that the orders are implemented, allocations are finalised and the person start working, so that entire matter is finalised at the earliest and the respective personnel should devote time in performing their duties instead of litigating.orderk.k. lahoti, j.1. this order will decide a batch of petitions, list of which is enclosed alongwith this order.2. the common point involved in the cases is the allocation of the employees from state of madhya pradesh to the state of chhattisgarh or vice-versa. after provisional allocation petitioners made representations to the committee constituted under section 71 of m.p. reorganisation act, 2000. the grievance in all the cases is common that the representations filed by the petitioner/petitioners were not properly considered by the committee and grievances remained unredressed, because of non-consideration or non-speaking order on representation. section 71 of the act reads as under:--'71. advisory committees.--the central government may, by order establish one or more advisory committees for the purpose of assisting it in regard to-- (a) the discharge of any of its functions under this part; and(b) the ensuring of fair and equitable treatment to all persons affected by the provisions of this part and the proper consideration of any representations made by such persons.' 3. from the perusal of the aforesaid provision it is apparent that the committee will ensure fair and equitable treatment to all the employees affected by the allocation. it is the duty of the committee to consider properly all the representations made by the affected persons. if the representations are not properly considered and the grievances remained unredressed then, the petitioners have been deprived the benefit of section 71 of the act which provides grievance redressal forum, to the employees in respect of their unwilling allocation and, entire purpose of formation of advisory committee will frustrate.4. shri r.s. patel, sr. standing counsel for union of india submits that if the representations are not decided properly by previous committee and the petitioners grievance remain unredressed, the union of india is ready to consider the fresh representations in accordance with the provisions of the act. if the petitioners submit fresh representations for the redressal of grievance duly supported by the documents, the central government would consider the same afresh. he makes a statement on behalf of central government that the policy which has been framed by the union of india will be implemented and the representations will be considered in accordance with the policy of the union of india in this regard. the grievances of each of the petitioner will be considered by the committee after giving due attention to the representations of the employees and final decision will be taken on each representation individually.5. shri v.k. tankha, advocate general for the state of m.p. and shri s.k. rao, standing counsel with shri radhe lal gupta, additional standing counsel for the state of chhattisgarh consented the aforesaid statement made by the learned counsel for union of india and submitted that both the states will give their full co-operation and assistance to the committee in deciding the representations. in this regard, they have placed their reliance on the single bench judgment of high court of chhattisgarh in w.p. no. 2112/2002, dated 28-4-2003 in which in identical circumstances following order was passed:--'18. shri murthy, appearing for the union of india has stated and submitted that if the representations as submitted duly supported by documents and copy of the petitions and annexures filed, the central government would consider the same afresh. it is submitted that the policy which has been framed is after due consideration and the representations will be decided in accordance with the provisions of law and the policies framed.19. it is consented that fair and equitable treatment envisages a decision, which is fair and equitable to all. reliance has been placed on a decision of the hon. apex court in the case of state of maharashtra v. chandrakant, reported in air 1981 sc 1990.20. it is pertinent to note that section 71 of the m.p. reorganisation act, 2000 casts a duty on central government enshrined under the said act. what is ensured is fair and equitable treatment to all persons affected by the provisions of part viii and the proper consideration of any representations made by such person. it is for the central government to ensure fair and equitable treatment to all persons affected by the relevant provisions of the part viii of the m.p. reorganisation act, 2000 and the proper consideration of any representations made by such persons. under the facts and circumstances this court would like to observe that power of central government is not exhausted merely by laying down criteria for final allotment but continues till entire process is completed, all problems, doubts resolved and all representations considered.21. having thus considered the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the statements made by the counsel on behalf of the parties, in the opinion of this court, ends of the justice will be served if an opportunity is given to the petitioners, those who desire, to make a detailed representations raising their grievances alongwith documents on or before 10th may, 2003 to the central government addressed to the government of india. department of personnel and training, ministry of personnel, public grievances and pensions, loknayak bhawan, khan market, new delhi (state reorganisation cell). same copy of the representation duly supported by all documents be also served on the concerned departments of both the states after obtaining the acknowledgment and both the states to forward the same to the central government with their comments and the requisite information and complete details within 30 days, in order to enable the central government to decide the representation. it is open to the central govt. to seek such further information from the state governments and on such requisition being made from the central government, the state governments will supply the same expeditiously. on such a representation being made, the central government shall consider and decide the same as early as possible preferably on or before 31st july, 2003 by passing appropriate order.22. so far as the cases of revised options are concerned, the petitioners of those cases are directed to specifically mention this fact in the representation. their representations shall be decided by the central govt. as directed above, it is also made clear that all the petitioners/employees will remain on duty on 1-8-2003 to receive the decision of the central government on their representations.23. counsel for the petitioners submitted that pursuant to interim orders passed by this court, they have not been relieved and they are continuing. this statement is made at the bar by the counsel for the petitioners and this is recorded. counsel for the state submitted that they could not verify about the individual cases and the statement made at the bar may be recorded. if in some cases or the other, it is found that the petitioners have made incorrect statement they may be given liberty to make a mention by filing application for modification. the statements are recorded and the liberty is given to the state, as prayed. relying on the statements made, it is directed that if the persons are not relieved they shall not be relieved. in the circumstances, it is directed that till the decision is given by the central government, the petitioners who have not been relieved and still continuing shall be allowed to continue. so far those who have been relieved are concerned, they should mention this fact in their representation and it is for the central government to pass such order which the central government deems fit. it is made clear that the decision on the representation would be communicated to the concerned departments, who after receiving it would communicate it to the employees concerned. the directions are being issued to the respective departments so that the decision taken is served on the petitioners.24. in the opinion of this court, it is in the interest of the employees as well as the respective governments that the orders are implemented, allocations are finalised and the person start working, so that entire matter is finalised at the earliest and the respective personnel should devote time in performing their duties instead of litigating.25. it is made clear that this court has considered the matter on broad consensus arrived at between the parties and has not expressed any option on the merits or otherwise of the case and it is left for consideration of the central government.26. with these observations these petitions are disposed of finally.27. consequently, m.w.p. and i.as., if any, stand disposed of,'6. relying on the aforesaid, learned counsel for the state of madhya pradesh and state of chhattisgarh submit that the representations filed by the petitioners may be considered and the similar directions may be issued in this case also. because in compliance of the aforesaid directions union of india has to consider the representations of the employees and similar treatment be given to the petitioners herein.7. learned counsel for the petitioners agreed to the aforesaid statement made by the learned standing counsel for union of india, state of madhya pradesh and state of chhattisgarh and submitted that before remitting the matter to the central government, the order of allocation may be quashed and the representations may be directed to be decided by the respondents, but, subsequently they have agreed that they will file fresh representations before the central government and their representations may be directed to be decided with a time bound programme till then some protection be given to the petitioners.8. to the aforesaid proposal, learned counsel for union of india, state of madhya pradesh and state of chhattisgarh have no objection.9. in view of the aforesaid contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties, all the matters deserve to be reconsidered by the central government. the reason behind of it is that the high court of chhattisgarh by the aforesaid order has directed for consideration of the representations by the central government. as stated at the bar that the central government has decided to implement the aforesaid order and the central government will decide the representations of the employees as directed by the high court of chhattisgarh, naturally, the central government has to give effect to the aforesaid order. as the aforesaid exercise has to be done by the central government in respect of the employees who were petitioners before the high court of chhattisgarh, similar treatment deserves to be given to the petitioners herein. the grievances are similar and all the employees have to be dealt with similarly on the principle of parity. apart from this, under section 71 of the aforesaid act, the central government is empowered to decide the representations through advisory committee. there is no bar under section 71 of the act to reconsider the representations either by the same advisory committee or by constituting a fresh advisory committee. as the aforesaid provision empowers the central government to establish one or more advisory committee for the purpose of implementing the objects of the act, the liability of the government is to ensure fair and equitable treatment to all the employees affected by the allocation. the employees have been given a statutory right for proper consideration of the representations. the proper consideration will include the application of the mind, consideration of the grievance and decision thereon. it is not merely an eye-wash given by the statutes. it is a fact and common knowledge that the partition gives pain to every affected person, if an employee has to go to another state without his willingness or he is having some genuine grounds to remain in the state of his choice, then his grievance is to be considered fairly and properly. this duty is cast on the central government and if such prayer is made by the employees hereinabove, then it is to be seen that their prayer, grievance may not be thrown without examining by the appropriate authority. as the central government is to implement the order of high court of chhattisgarh by deciding the representations as directed by the high court of chhattisgarh, in the circumstances, in these petitions similar directions deserve to be issued to the respondents, as agreed hereinabove.10. in view of the aforesaid, following directions are issued :--(a) the petitioners may file fresh representations to government of india, department of personnel and training, ministry of personnel, public grievances and pensions, loknayak bhawan, khan market, new delhi (state re-organisation cell) within a period of 30 days from today. this representation shall be sent by the concerned employee through proper channel, i.e., through their concerning department. petitioners shall also send one copy of their representations, apart from through proper channel directly to central government on above address by speed post, within the aforesaid period. along with this representations petitioners will enclose their previous representations and necessary authentic documents (if any) for ready reference to the respondents. the petitioner in the representation will give his correct and complete postal address and specify his present place of posting. if he is working because of some interim order of the high court, tribunal or otherwise, he will specify this in the representation.(b) on receiving the representations by the central government, the comment of both the governments will be called. the representations sent by the employees through departments shall accompany comments of the concerned departments on forwarding the representations, touching all the points involved in the representations. this will be done by the concerning departments within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the representations from petitioners or from the central government for comments. it will be open to the central government to seek further information from the state government and on such requisition being made from the central government, the concerned state government will supply the same expeditiously, not later than 15 days from the date of receipt of such communication.(c) the concerned government will also send its comments within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the notices in this regard to the central government.(d) on receipt of the aforesaid, central government will decide each representation after considering the merits and the grievances raised in the representations within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the comments from the state governments. the central government shall be within the powers either to consider the representations itself or to constitute an advisory committee in accordance with the provisions of section 71.(e) the decision of the central government will be communicated to the employees forthwith through the concerning department who will receive the acknowledgment of the concerned employee on the communication, if the employee is not available or avoid the communication, the concerned department will send the decision to the employee by registered a/d post on the address given by the employee on the representation and this will be deemed sufficient compliance of the order. the decision of the central government will be given effect to after 15 days from the date of communication of the order to the concerned employee. the employee will be allowed 15 days' time to comply with the order. if the employee feels aggrieved with the aforesaid decision, he/she will be free to approach the appropriate forum for the redressal of the grievance. (f) it is made clear that while central government deciding the representations of the petitioner finds appropriate to afford some opportunity of hearing to the concerned employee, it will be within the discretion of the central government to afford such opportunity to the employee for the redressal of grievances. (g) the employees who have joined their successor state will continue in the same state. those employees who were not relieved or were permitted to rejoin or continue by interim order of the tribunal or otherwise shall be permitted to continue in the state in the same cadre (as per the allocation) till the decision on the representation as directed hereinabove.11. it is made clear that this court has considered the entire matter on broad consensus arrived at between the parties and has not expressed any opinion on the merits or otherwise of the case and it is left for the consideration of the central government.12. with the aforesaid directions, all the petitions are finally disposed of.

Judgment:
ORDER

K.K. Lahoti, J.

1. This order will decide a batch of petitions, list of which is enclosed alongwith this order.

2. The common point involved in the cases is the allocation of the employees from State of Madhya Pradesh to the State of Chhattisgarh or vice-versa. After provisional allocation petitioners made representations to the Committee constituted under Section 71 of M.P. Reorganisation Act, 2000. The grievance in all the cases is common that the representations filed by the petitioner/petitioners were not properly considered by the Committee and grievances remained unredressed, because of non-consideration or non-speaking order on representation. Section 71 of the Act reads as under:--

'71. Advisory Committees.--The Central Government may, by order establish one or more Advisory Committees for the purpose of assisting it in regard to--

(a) the discharge of any of its functions under this Part; and

(b) the ensuring of fair and equitable treatment to all persons affected by the provisions of this Part and the proper consideration of any representations made by such persons.'

3. From the perusal of the aforesaid provision it is apparent that the Committee will ensure fair and equitable treatment to all the employees affected by the allocation. It is the duty of the Committee to consider properly all the representations made by the affected persons. If the representations are not properly considered and the grievances remained unredressed then, the petitioners have been deprived the benefit of Section 71 of the Act which provides grievance redressal forum, to the employees in respect of their unwilling allocation and, entire purpose of formation of Advisory Committee will frustrate.

4. Shri R.S. Patel, Sr. Standing Counsel for Union of India submits that if the representations are not decided properly by previous committee and the petitioners grievance remain unredressed, the Union of India is ready to consider the fresh representations in accordance with the provisions of the Act. If the petitioners submit fresh representations for the redressal of grievance duly supported by the documents, the Central Government would consider the same afresh. He makes a statement on behalf of Central Government that the policy which has been framed by the Union of India will be implemented and the representations will be considered in accordance with the policy of the Union of India in this regard. The grievances of each of the petitioner will be considered by the Committee after giving due attention to the representations of the employees and final decision will be taken on each representation individually.

5. Shri V.K. Tankha, Advocate General for the State of M.P. and Shri S.K. Rao, Standing Counsel with Shri Radhe Lal Gupta, Additional Standing Counsel for the State of Chhattisgarh consented the aforesaid statement made by the learned Counsel for Union of India and submitted that both the States will give their full co-operation and assistance to the Committee in deciding the representations. In this regard, they have placed their reliance on the Single Bench judgment of High Court of Chhattisgarh in W.P. No. 2112/2002, dated 28-4-2003 in which in identical circumstances following order was passed:--

'18. Shri Murthy, appearing for the Union of India has stated and submitted that if the representations as submitted duly supported by documents and copy of the petitions and annexures filed, the Central Government would consider the same afresh. It is submitted that the Policy which has been framed is after due consideration and the representations will be decided in accordance with the provisions of law and the policies framed.

19. It is consented that fair and equitable treatment envisages a decision, which is fair and equitable to all. Reliance has been placed on a decision of the Hon. Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Chandrakant, reported in AIR 1981 SC 1990.

20. It is pertinent to note that Section 71 of the M.P. Reorganisation Act, 2000 casts a duty on Central Government enshrined under the said Act. What is ensured is fair and equitable treatment to all persons affected by the provisions of Part VIII and the proper consideration of any representations made by such person. It is for the Central Government to ensure fair and equitable treatment to all persons affected by the relevant provisions of the Part VIII of the M.P. Reorganisation Act, 2000 and the proper consideration of any representations made by such persons. Under the facts and circumstances this Court would like to observe that power of Central Government is not exhausted merely by laying down criteria for final allotment but continues till entire process is completed, all problems, doubts resolved and all representations considered.

21. Having thus considered the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the statements made by the Counsel on behalf of the parties, in the opinion of this Court, ends of the justice will be served if an opportunity is given to the petitioners, those who desire, to make a detailed representations raising their grievances alongwith documents on or before 10th May, 2003 to the Central Government addressed to the Government of India. Department of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Loknayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi (State Reorganisation Cell). Same copy of the representation duly supported by all documents be also served on the concerned Departments of both the States after obtaining the acknowledgment and both the States to forward the same to the Central Government with their comments and the requisite information and complete details within 30 days, in order to enable the Central Government to decide the representation. It is open to the Central Govt. to seek such further information from the State Governments and on such requisition being made from the Central Government, the State Governments will supply the same expeditiously. On such a representation being made, the Central Government shall consider and decide the same as early as possible preferably on or before 31st July, 2003 by passing appropriate order.

22. So far as the cases of revised options are concerned, the petitioners of those cases are directed to specifically mention this fact in the representation. Their representations shall be decided by the Central Govt. as directed above, it is also made clear that all the petitioners/employees will remain on duty on 1-8-2003 to receive the decision of the Central Government on their representations.

23. Counsel for the petitioners submitted that pursuant to interim orders passed by this Court, they have not been relieved and they are continuing. This statement is made at the Bar by the Counsel for the petitioners and this is recorded. Counsel for the State submitted that they could not verify about the individual cases and the statement made at the Bar may be recorded. If in some cases or the other, it is found that the petitioners have made incorrect statement they may be given liberty to make a mention by filing application for modification. The statements are recorded and the liberty is given to the State, as prayed. Relying on the statements made, it is directed that if the persons are not relieved they shall not be relieved. In the circumstances, it is directed that till the decision is given by the Central Government, the petitioners who have not been relieved and still continuing shall be allowed to continue. So far those who have been relieved are concerned, they should mention this fact in their representation and it is for the Central Government to pass such order which the Central Government deems fit. It is made clear that the decision on the representation would be communicated to the concerned departments, who after receiving it would communicate it to the employees concerned. The directions are being issued to the respective departments so that the decision taken is served on the petitioners.

24. In the opinion of this Court, it is in the interest of the employees as well as the respective Governments that the orders are implemented, allocations are finalised and the person start working, so that entire matter is finalised at the earliest and the respective personnel should devote time in performing their duties instead of litigating.

25. It is made clear that this Court has considered the matter on broad consensus arrived at between the parties and has not expressed any option on the merits or otherwise of the case and it is left for consideration of the Central Government.

26. With these observations these petitions are disposed of finally.

27. Consequently, M.W.P. and I.As., if any, stand disposed of,'

6. Relying on the aforesaid, learned Counsel for the State of Madhya Pradesh and State of Chhattisgarh submit that the representations filed by the petitioners may be considered and the similar directions may be issued in this case also. Because in compliance of the aforesaid directions Union of India has to consider the representations of the employees and similar treatment be given to the petitioners herein.

7. Learned Counsel for the petitioners agreed to the aforesaid statement made by the learned Standing Counsel for Union of India, State of Madhya Pradesh and State of Chhattisgarh and submitted that before remitting the matter to the Central Government, the order of allocation may be quashed and the representations may be directed to be decided by the respondents, but, subsequently they have agreed that they will file fresh representations before the Central Government and their representations may be directed to be decided with a time bound programme till then some protection be given to the petitioners.

8. To the aforesaid proposal, learned Counsel for Union of India, State of Madhya Pradesh and State of Chhattisgarh have no objection.

9. In view of the aforesaid contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the parties, all the matters deserve to be reconsidered by the Central Government. The reason behind of it is that the High Court of Chhattisgarh by the aforesaid order has directed for consideration of the representations by the Central Government. As stated at the Bar that the Central Government has decided to implement the aforesaid order and the Central Government will decide the representations of the employees as directed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh, naturally, the Central Government has to give effect to the aforesaid order. As the aforesaid exercise has to be done by the Central Government in respect of the employees who were petitioners before the High Court of Chhattisgarh, similar treatment deserves to be given to the petitioners herein. The grievances are similar and all the employees have to be dealt with similarly on the principle of parity. Apart from this, under Section 71 of the aforesaid Act, the Central Government is empowered to decide the representations through Advisory Committee. There is no bar under Section 71 of the Act to reconsider the representations either by the same Advisory Committee or by constituting a fresh Advisory Committee. As the aforesaid provision empowers the Central Government to establish one or more Advisory Committee for the purpose of implementing the objects of the Act, the liability of the Government is to ensure fair and equitable treatment to all the employees affected by the allocation. The employees have been given a statutory right for proper consideration of the representations. The proper consideration will include the application of the mind, consideration of the grievance and decision thereon. It is not merely an eye-wash given by the statutes. It is a fact and common knowledge that the partition gives pain to every affected person, if an employee has to go to another State without his willingness or he is having some genuine grounds to remain in the State of his choice, then his grievance is to be considered fairly and properly. This duty is cast on the Central Government and if such prayer is made by the employees hereinabove, then it is to be seen that their prayer, grievance may not be thrown without examining by the appropriate authority. As the Central Government is to implement the order of High Court of Chhattisgarh by deciding the representations as directed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh, in the circumstances, in these petitions similar directions deserve to be issued to the respondents, as agreed hereinabove.

10. In view of the aforesaid, following directions are issued :--

(A) The petitioners may file fresh representations to Government of India, Department of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Loknayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi (State Re-organisation Cell) within a period of 30 days from today. This representation shall be sent by the concerned employee through proper channel, i.e., through their concerning department. Petitioners shall also send one copy of their representations, apart from through proper channel directly to Central Government on above address by speed post, within the aforesaid period. Along with this representations petitioners will enclose their previous representations and necessary authentic documents (if any) for ready reference to the respondents. The petitioner in the representation will give his correct and complete postal address and specify his present place of posting. If he is working because of some interim order of the High Court, Tribunal or otherwise, he will specify this in the representation.

(B) On receiving the representations by the Central Government, the comment of both the Governments will be called. The representations sent by the employees through departments shall accompany comments of the concerned departments on forwarding the representations, touching all the points involved in the representations. This will be done by the concerning departments within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the representations from petitioners or from the Central Government for comments. It will be open to the Central Government to seek further information from the State Government and on such requisition being made from the Central Government, the concerned State Government will supply the same expeditiously, not later than 15 days from the date of receipt of such communication.

(C) The concerned Government will also send its comments within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the notices in this regard to the Central Government.

(D) On receipt of the aforesaid, Central Government will decide each representation after considering the merits and the grievances raised in the representations within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the comments from the State Governments. The Central Government shall be within the powers either to consider the representations itself or to constitute an Advisory Committee in accordance with the provisions of Section 71.

(E) The decision of the Central Government will be communicated to the employees forthwith through the concerning Department who will receive the acknowledgment of the concerned employee on the communication, if the employee is not available or avoid the communication, the concerned department will send the decision to the employee by Registered A/D post on the address given by the employee on the representation and this will be deemed sufficient compliance of the order. The decision of the Central Government will be given effect to after 15 days from the date of communication of the order to the concerned employee. The employee will be allowed 15 days' time to comply with the order. If the employee feels aggrieved with the aforesaid decision, he/she will be free to approach the appropriate forum for the redressal of the grievance. (F) It is made clear that while Central Government deciding the representations of the petitioner finds appropriate to afford some opportunity of hearing to the concerned employee, it will be within the discretion of the Central Government to afford such opportunity to the employee for the redressal of grievances. (G) The employees who have joined their successor State will continue in the same State. Those employees who were not relieved or were permitted to rejoin or continue by interim order of the Tribunal or otherwise shall be permitted to continue in the State in the same cadre (as per the allocation) till the decision on the representation as directed hereinabove.

11. It is made clear that this Court has considered the entire matter on broad consensus arrived at between the parties and has not expressed any opinion on the merits or otherwise of the case and it is left for the consideration of the Central Government.

12. With the aforesaid directions, all the petitions are finally disposed of.