Semantic Analysis by spaCy
Matu Lal Dhruve Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Decided On : Oct-05-2012
Court : Madhya Pradesh
Notice (8): Undefined index: topics [APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 36]Code Context$shops2 = $shops['topics'];$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/meta.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Matu Lal Dhruve Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Semantic Analysis', 'shops' => array( 'PERSON' => array( (int) 0 => 'Shri Vivek Sharma', (int) 1 => 'Panel Lawyer', (int) 2 => 'Prerna', (int) 3 => '02/11/2001', (int) 4 => '02/11/2001', (int) 5 => '02/11/2001', (int) 6 => 'Prerna', (int) 7 => 'Prerna' ), 'ORDINAL' => array( (int) 0 => 'second', (int) 1 => 'second', (int) 2 => 'second', (int) 3 => 'second' ), 'ORG' => array( (int) 0 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 1 => 'Court', (int) 2 => 'Prerna W/o Shri Pramod Koranne versus State', (int) 3 => 'Court', (int) 4 => 'State', (int) 5 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 6 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 7 => 'Teachers of Education Department', (int) 8 => 'Tribal Welfare Department', (int) 9 => 'Government', (int) 10 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 11 => 'the General Administration Department', (int) 12 => 'the State Government', (int) 13 => 'Court' ), 'GPE' => array( (int) 0 => 'Smt', (int) 1 => 'Smt', (int) 2 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 3 => 'Smt', (int) 4 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 5 => 'K.K.Trivedi' ), 'DATE' => array( (int) 0 => '26.04.2007', (int) 1 => '26.05.2008', (int) 2 => '21/03/1983 19/4/1999', (int) 3 => '21/03/1983', (int) 4 => 'three months', (int) 5 => '21/03/1983', (int) 6 => 'the period of 6 months', (int) 7 => 'today', (int) 8 => 'a period of', (int) 9 => 'two months', (int) 10 => 'two months' ), 'CARDINAL' => array( (int) 0 => 'one', (int) 1 => '17' ), 'PERCENT' => array( (int) 0 => '6%', (int) 1 => '9%' ) ), 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '1051635', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => null, 'appellant' => 'Matu Lal Dhruve', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Matu Lal Dhruve Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh', 'court_type' => 'HC', 'decidedon' => '2012-10-05', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<p>W.P.No.16503/2012 05.10.2012 Shri Naval Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Vivek Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State on advance notice.</p><p> Heard on the question of admission.</p><p> Petitioners are challenging an action of the respondents in denying the benefit of second Kramonnati and proposing to make recovery of benefit already granted, the question involved in this petition already decided by a Bench of this Court in the case of Smt.</p><p> Prerna W/o Shri Pramod Koranne versus State of M.P.and others in W.P.No.6773/2006, decided on 26.04.2007, and subsequently followed by this Court in series of cases, one such order being W.P.No.5756/2008 (s).Shri R.C.Chaurasiya and others versus State of M.P.and otheRs.decided on 26.05.2008.</p><p> In the case of Smt.</p><p> Prerna (supra) the directions given is as under.</p><p> “17.</p><p> Consequently these petitions are allowed.</p><p> The petitioners are entitled to derive the benefit of second Kramonnati according to the terms and conditions mentioned in the circular dated 21/03/1983 19/4/1999, 02/11/2001 and 03/09/2005.</p><p> Accordingly, these petitions are disposed of with the following directions: (i) Clause-3 of policy dated 03/09/2005 fixing the cut of date 01/08/2003 to grant the benefit of second Kramonnati to the teachers is arbitrary, discriminatory, hence quashed.</p><p> (ii) Teachers of Education Department or Tribal Welfare Department held entitled to get the benefit of Kramonnati under the policy dated 21/03/1983, 19/04/1999 and 02/11/2001, in accordance with the terms and conditions as specified therein.</p><p> (iii) In view of the said directions, if the orders of recovery passed by the Government against petitioners are quashed, and if any amount is recovered from them for said reasons be refunded back to them within three months, with interest @ 6% per annum, on failure to comply the said directions within the aforesaid time, the interest @ 9% per annum will be levyable.</p><p> (iv) In some of the cases, the benefit of second Kramonnati has not been allowed to the petitioneRs.however, on due consideration of their cases, the respondents are directed to do the needful in accordance with the policy dated 21/03/1983, 19/04/1999, 02/11/2001 and 03/09/2005 and settled their claim including post retiral and pensionary benefits within the period of 6 months from today and the arrears thereof be released along with permissible amount of interest under the law.”</p><p> Keeping in view the aforesaid, the respondents shall examine the case of petitioners in the light of the aforesaid directions within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and if it is found that petitioners are also entitled to similar benefit in the light of law laid down in the case of Smt.</p><p> Prerna (supra).an appropriate speaking order be passed.</p><p> Amount, if any, recovered from the petitioners in pursuance to the impugned action, shall also be refunded in case it is found that petitioners are entitled to similar benefit.</p><p> Needless to emphasize that order as directed hereinabove shall be passed and communicated to the petitioners within two months.</p><p> Accordingly, orders impugned in this petition are quashed and in the case of petitioneRs.who have retired from services necessary action be taken for revision of their pension and other post retiral benefits.</p><p> If for any reason whatsoever, the State Govt.</p><p> finds that the benefit cannot be extended, it is for the authorities concerned to record the reasons for the same and pass a speaking order.</p><p> It is made clear that since the scheme of Kramonnati is made by the General Administration Department for all employees of all the department of the State Government the order passed by this Court in the case of Prerna (supra) would be applicable in case of all the employees similarly situated, irrespective of the department in which they are appointed.</p><p> Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid.</p><p> Certified copy as per rules.</p><p> (K.K.Trivedi) Judge b b', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'The State of Madhya Pradesh', 'sub' => null, 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ), 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '1051635' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Matu Lal Dhruve Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Semantic Analysis' $shops = array( 'PERSON' => array( (int) 0 => 'Shri Vivek Sharma', (int) 1 => 'Panel Lawyer', (int) 2 => 'Prerna', (int) 3 => '02/11/2001', (int) 4 => '02/11/2001', (int) 5 => '02/11/2001', (int) 6 => 'Prerna', (int) 7 => 'Prerna' ), 'ORDINAL' => array( (int) 0 => 'second', (int) 1 => 'second', (int) 2 => 'second', (int) 3 => 'second' ), 'ORG' => array( (int) 0 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 1 => 'Court', (int) 2 => 'Prerna W/o Shri Pramod Koranne versus State', (int) 3 => 'Court', (int) 4 => 'State', (int) 5 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 6 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 7 => 'Teachers of Education Department', (int) 8 => 'Tribal Welfare Department', (int) 9 => 'Government', (int) 10 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 11 => 'the General Administration Department', (int) 12 => 'the State Government', (int) 13 => 'Court' ), 'GPE' => array( (int) 0 => 'Smt', (int) 1 => 'Smt', (int) 2 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 3 => 'Smt', (int) 4 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 5 => 'K.K.Trivedi' ), 'DATE' => array( (int) 0 => '26.04.2007', (int) 1 => '26.05.2008', (int) 2 => '21/03/1983 19/4/1999', (int) 3 => '21/03/1983', (int) 4 => 'three months', (int) 5 => '21/03/1983', (int) 6 => 'the period of 6 months', (int) 7 => 'today', (int) 8 => 'a period of', (int) 9 => 'two months', (int) 10 => 'two months' ), 'CARDINAL' => array( (int) 0 => 'one', (int) 1 => '17' ), 'PERCENT' => array( (int) 0 => '6%', (int) 1 => '9%' ) ) $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '1051635', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => null, 'appellant' => 'Matu Lal Dhruve', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Matu Lal Dhruve Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh', 'court_type' => 'HC', 'decidedon' => '2012-10-05', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<p>W.P.No.16503/2012 05.10.2012 Shri Naval Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Vivek Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State on advance notice.</p><p> Heard on the question of admission.</p><p> Petitioners are challenging an action of the respondents in denying the benefit of second Kramonnati and proposing to make recovery of benefit already granted, the question involved in this petition already decided by a Bench of this Court in the case of Smt.</p><p> Prerna W/o Shri Pramod Koranne versus State of M.P.and others in W.P.No.6773/2006, decided on 26.04.2007, and subsequently followed by this Court in series of cases, one such order being W.P.No.5756/2008 (s).Shri R.C.Chaurasiya and others versus State of M.P.and otheRs.decided on 26.05.2008.</p><p> In the case of Smt.</p><p> Prerna (supra) the directions given is as under.</p><p> “17.</p><p> Consequently these petitions are allowed.</p><p> The petitioners are entitled to derive the benefit of second Kramonnati according to the terms and conditions mentioned in the circular dated 21/03/1983 19/4/1999, 02/11/2001 and 03/09/2005.</p><p> Accordingly, these petitions are disposed of with the following directions: (i) Clause-3 of policy dated 03/09/2005 fixing the cut of date 01/08/2003 to grant the benefit of second Kramonnati to the teachers is arbitrary, discriminatory, hence quashed.</p><p> (ii) Teachers of Education Department or Tribal Welfare Department held entitled to get the benefit of Kramonnati under the policy dated 21/03/1983, 19/04/1999 and 02/11/2001, in accordance with the terms and conditions as specified therein.</p><p> (iii) In view of the said directions, if the orders of recovery passed by the Government against petitioners are quashed, and if any amount is recovered from them for said reasons be refunded back to them within three months, with interest @ 6% per annum, on failure to comply the said directions within the aforesaid time, the interest @ 9% per annum will be levyable.</p><p> (iv) In some of the cases, the benefit of second Kramonnati has not been allowed to the petitioneRs.however, on due consideration of their cases, the respondents are directed to do the needful in accordance with the policy dated 21/03/1983, 19/04/1999, 02/11/2001 and 03/09/2005 and settled their claim including post retiral and pensionary benefits within the period of 6 months from today and the arrears thereof be released along with permissible amount of interest under the law.”</p><p> Keeping in view the aforesaid, the respondents shall examine the case of petitioners in the light of the aforesaid directions within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and if it is found that petitioners are also entitled to similar benefit in the light of law laid down in the case of Smt.</p><p> Prerna (supra).an appropriate speaking order be passed.</p><p> Amount, if any, recovered from the petitioners in pursuance to the impugned action, shall also be refunded in case it is found that petitioners are entitled to similar benefit.</p><p> Needless to emphasize that order as directed hereinabove shall be passed and communicated to the petitioners within two months.</p><p> Accordingly, orders impugned in this petition are quashed and in the case of petitioneRs.who have retired from services necessary action be taken for revision of their pension and other post retiral benefits.</p><p> If for any reason whatsoever, the State Govt.</p><p> finds that the benefit cannot be extended, it is for the authorities concerned to record the reasons for the same and pass a speaking order.</p><p> It is made clear that since the scheme of Kramonnati is made by the General Administration Department for all employees of all the department of the State Government the order passed by this Court in the case of Prerna (supra) would be applicable in case of all the employees similarly situated, irrespective of the department in which they are appointed.</p><p> Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid.</p><p> Certified copy as per rules.</p><p> (K.K.Trivedi) Judge b b', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'The State of Madhya Pradesh', 'sub' => null, 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ) $args = array( (int) 0 => '1051635' ) $pattern = '/\(((0[1-9]|[12][0-9]|3[01])[.](0[1-9]|1[012])[.](17|18|19|20)[0-9]{2}).*\)/'include - APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 36 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
Warning (2): Invalid argument supplied for foreach() [APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 39]Code Context//$shops = $shops['entities'];foreach ($shops2 as $key => $val) {$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/meta.ctp' $dataForView = array( 'title_for_layout' => 'Matu Lal Dhruve Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Semantic Analysis', 'shops' => array( 'PERSON' => array( (int) 0 => 'Shri Vivek Sharma', (int) 1 => 'Panel Lawyer', (int) 2 => 'Prerna', (int) 3 => '02/11/2001', (int) 4 => '02/11/2001', (int) 5 => '02/11/2001', (int) 6 => 'Prerna', (int) 7 => 'Prerna' ), 'ORDINAL' => array( (int) 0 => 'second', (int) 1 => 'second', (int) 2 => 'second', (int) 3 => 'second' ), 'ORG' => array( (int) 0 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 1 => 'Court', (int) 2 => 'Prerna W/o Shri Pramod Koranne versus State', (int) 3 => 'Court', (int) 4 => 'State', (int) 5 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 6 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 7 => 'Teachers of Education Department', (int) 8 => 'Tribal Welfare Department', (int) 9 => 'Government', (int) 10 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 11 => 'the General Administration Department', (int) 12 => 'the State Government', (int) 13 => 'Court' ), 'GPE' => array( (int) 0 => 'Smt', (int) 1 => 'Smt', (int) 2 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 3 => 'Smt', (int) 4 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 5 => 'K.K.Trivedi' ), 'DATE' => array( (int) 0 => '26.04.2007', (int) 1 => '26.05.2008', (int) 2 => '21/03/1983 19/4/1999', (int) 3 => '21/03/1983', (int) 4 => 'three months', (int) 5 => '21/03/1983', (int) 6 => 'the period of 6 months', (int) 7 => 'today', (int) 8 => 'a period of', (int) 9 => 'two months', (int) 10 => 'two months' ), 'CARDINAL' => array( (int) 0 => 'one', (int) 1 => '17' ), 'PERCENT' => array( (int) 0 => '6%', (int) 1 => '9%' ) ), 'desc' => array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '1051635', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => null, 'appellant' => 'Matu Lal Dhruve', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Matu Lal Dhruve Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh', 'court_type' => 'HC', 'decidedon' => '2012-10-05', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<p>W.P.No.16503/2012 05.10.2012 Shri Naval Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Vivek Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State on advance notice.</p><p> Heard on the question of admission.</p><p> Petitioners are challenging an action of the respondents in denying the benefit of second Kramonnati and proposing to make recovery of benefit already granted, the question involved in this petition already decided by a Bench of this Court in the case of Smt.</p><p> Prerna W/o Shri Pramod Koranne versus State of M.P.and others in W.P.No.6773/2006, decided on 26.04.2007, and subsequently followed by this Court in series of cases, one such order being W.P.No.5756/2008 (s).Shri R.C.Chaurasiya and others versus State of M.P.and otheRs.decided on 26.05.2008.</p><p> In the case of Smt.</p><p> Prerna (supra) the directions given is as under.</p><p> “17.</p><p> Consequently these petitions are allowed.</p><p> The petitioners are entitled to derive the benefit of second Kramonnati according to the terms and conditions mentioned in the circular dated 21/03/1983 19/4/1999, 02/11/2001 and 03/09/2005.</p><p> Accordingly, these petitions are disposed of with the following directions: (i) Clause-3 of policy dated 03/09/2005 fixing the cut of date 01/08/2003 to grant the benefit of second Kramonnati to the teachers is arbitrary, discriminatory, hence quashed.</p><p> (ii) Teachers of Education Department or Tribal Welfare Department held entitled to get the benefit of Kramonnati under the policy dated 21/03/1983, 19/04/1999 and 02/11/2001, in accordance with the terms and conditions as specified therein.</p><p> (iii) In view of the said directions, if the orders of recovery passed by the Government against petitioners are quashed, and if any amount is recovered from them for said reasons be refunded back to them within three months, with interest @ 6% per annum, on failure to comply the said directions within the aforesaid time, the interest @ 9% per annum will be levyable.</p><p> (iv) In some of the cases, the benefit of second Kramonnati has not been allowed to the petitioneRs.however, on due consideration of their cases, the respondents are directed to do the needful in accordance with the policy dated 21/03/1983, 19/04/1999, 02/11/2001 and 03/09/2005 and settled their claim including post retiral and pensionary benefits within the period of 6 months from today and the arrears thereof be released along with permissible amount of interest under the law.”</p><p> Keeping in view the aforesaid, the respondents shall examine the case of petitioners in the light of the aforesaid directions within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and if it is found that petitioners are also entitled to similar benefit in the light of law laid down in the case of Smt.</p><p> Prerna (supra).an appropriate speaking order be passed.</p><p> Amount, if any, recovered from the petitioners in pursuance to the impugned action, shall also be refunded in case it is found that petitioners are entitled to similar benefit.</p><p> Needless to emphasize that order as directed hereinabove shall be passed and communicated to the petitioners within two months.</p><p> Accordingly, orders impugned in this petition are quashed and in the case of petitioneRs.who have retired from services necessary action be taken for revision of their pension and other post retiral benefits.</p><p> If for any reason whatsoever, the State Govt.</p><p> finds that the benefit cannot be extended, it is for the authorities concerned to record the reasons for the same and pass a speaking order.</p><p> It is made clear that since the scheme of Kramonnati is made by the General Administration Department for all employees of all the department of the State Government the order passed by this Court in the case of Prerna (supra) would be applicable in case of all the employees similarly situated, irrespective of the department in which they are appointed.</p><p> Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid.</p><p> Certified copy as per rules.</p><p> (K.K.Trivedi) Judge b b', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'The State of Madhya Pradesh', 'sub' => null, 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ), 'args' => array( (int) 0 => '1051635' ) ) $title_for_layout = 'Matu Lal Dhruve Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Semantic Analysis' $shops = array( 'PERSON' => array( (int) 0 => 'Shri Vivek Sharma', (int) 1 => 'Panel Lawyer', (int) 2 => 'Prerna', (int) 3 => '02/11/2001', (int) 4 => '02/11/2001', (int) 5 => '02/11/2001', (int) 6 => 'Prerna', (int) 7 => 'Prerna' ), 'ORDINAL' => array( (int) 0 => 'second', (int) 1 => 'second', (int) 2 => 'second', (int) 3 => 'second' ), 'ORG' => array( (int) 0 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 1 => 'Court', (int) 2 => 'Prerna W/o Shri Pramod Koranne versus State', (int) 3 => 'Court', (int) 4 => 'State', (int) 5 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 6 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 7 => 'Teachers of Education Department', (int) 8 => 'Tribal Welfare Department', (int) 9 => 'Government', (int) 10 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 11 => 'the General Administration Department', (int) 12 => 'the State Government', (int) 13 => 'Court' ), 'GPE' => array( (int) 0 => 'Smt', (int) 1 => 'Smt', (int) 2 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 3 => 'Smt', (int) 4 => 'Kramonnati', (int) 5 => 'K.K.Trivedi' ), 'DATE' => array( (int) 0 => '26.04.2007', (int) 1 => '26.05.2008', (int) 2 => '21/03/1983 19/4/1999', (int) 3 => '21/03/1983', (int) 4 => 'three months', (int) 5 => '21/03/1983', (int) 6 => 'the period of 6 months', (int) 7 => 'today', (int) 8 => 'a period of', (int) 9 => 'two months', (int) 10 => 'two months' ), 'CARDINAL' => array( (int) 0 => 'one', (int) 1 => '17' ), 'PERCENT' => array( (int) 0 => '6%', (int) 1 => '9%' ) ) $desc = array( 'Judgement' => array( 'id' => '1051635', 'acts' => null, 'appealno' => null, 'appellant' => 'Matu Lal Dhruve', 'authreffered' => null, 'casename' => 'Matu Lal Dhruve Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh', 'casenote' => '', 'caseanalysis' => null, 'casesref' => null, 'citingcases' => null, 'counselplain' => null, 'counseldef' => null, 'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh', 'court_type' => 'HC', 'decidedon' => '2012-10-05', 'deposition' => null, 'favorof' => null, 'findings' => null, 'judge' => null, 'judgement' => '<p>W.P.No.16503/2012 05.10.2012 Shri Naval Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Vivek Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State on advance notice.</p><p> Heard on the question of admission.</p><p> Petitioners are challenging an action of the respondents in denying the benefit of second Kramonnati and proposing to make recovery of benefit already granted, the question involved in this petition already decided by a Bench of this Court in the case of Smt.</p><p> Prerna W/o Shri Pramod Koranne versus State of M.P.and others in W.P.No.6773/2006, decided on 26.04.2007, and subsequently followed by this Court in series of cases, one such order being W.P.No.5756/2008 (s).Shri R.C.Chaurasiya and others versus State of M.P.and otheRs.decided on 26.05.2008.</p><p> In the case of Smt.</p><p> Prerna (supra) the directions given is as under.</p><p> “17.</p><p> Consequently these petitions are allowed.</p><p> The petitioners are entitled to derive the benefit of second Kramonnati according to the terms and conditions mentioned in the circular dated 21/03/1983 19/4/1999, 02/11/2001 and 03/09/2005.</p><p> Accordingly, these petitions are disposed of with the following directions: (i) Clause-3 of policy dated 03/09/2005 fixing the cut of date 01/08/2003 to grant the benefit of second Kramonnati to the teachers is arbitrary, discriminatory, hence quashed.</p><p> (ii) Teachers of Education Department or Tribal Welfare Department held entitled to get the benefit of Kramonnati under the policy dated 21/03/1983, 19/04/1999 and 02/11/2001, in accordance with the terms and conditions as specified therein.</p><p> (iii) In view of the said directions, if the orders of recovery passed by the Government against petitioners are quashed, and if any amount is recovered from them for said reasons be refunded back to them within three months, with interest @ 6% per annum, on failure to comply the said directions within the aforesaid time, the interest @ 9% per annum will be levyable.</p><p> (iv) In some of the cases, the benefit of second Kramonnati has not been allowed to the petitioneRs.however, on due consideration of their cases, the respondents are directed to do the needful in accordance with the policy dated 21/03/1983, 19/04/1999, 02/11/2001 and 03/09/2005 and settled their claim including post retiral and pensionary benefits within the period of 6 months from today and the arrears thereof be released along with permissible amount of interest under the law.”</p><p> Keeping in view the aforesaid, the respondents shall examine the case of petitioners in the light of the aforesaid directions within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and if it is found that petitioners are also entitled to similar benefit in the light of law laid down in the case of Smt.</p><p> Prerna (supra).an appropriate speaking order be passed.</p><p> Amount, if any, recovered from the petitioners in pursuance to the impugned action, shall also be refunded in case it is found that petitioners are entitled to similar benefit.</p><p> Needless to emphasize that order as directed hereinabove shall be passed and communicated to the petitioners within two months.</p><p> Accordingly, orders impugned in this petition are quashed and in the case of petitioneRs.who have retired from services necessary action be taken for revision of their pension and other post retiral benefits.</p><p> If for any reason whatsoever, the State Govt.</p><p> finds that the benefit cannot be extended, it is for the authorities concerned to record the reasons for the same and pass a speaking order.</p><p> It is made clear that since the scheme of Kramonnati is made by the General Administration Department for all employees of all the department of the State Government the order passed by this Court in the case of Prerna (supra) would be applicable in case of all the employees similarly situated, irrespective of the department in which they are appointed.</p><p> Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid.</p><p> Certified copy as per rules.</p><p> (K.K.Trivedi) Judge b b', 'observations' => null, 'overruledby' => null, 'prhistory' => null, 'pubs' => null, 'ratiodecidendi' => null, 'respondent' => 'The State of Madhya Pradesh', 'sub' => null, 'link' => null, 'circuit' => null ) ) $args = array( (int) 0 => '1051635' ) $pattern = '/\(((0[1-9]|[12][0-9]|3[01])[.](0[1-9]|1[012])[.](17|18|19|20)[0-9]{2}).*\)/' $shops2 = nullinclude - APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 39 View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971 View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933 View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473 Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963 Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200 Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167 [main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109
PERSON: Shri Vivek Sharma, Panel Lawyer, Prerna, 02/11/2001, 02/11/2001, 02/11/2001, Prerna, Prerna
ORDINAL: second, second, second, second
ORG: Kramonnati, Court, Prerna W/o Shri Pramod Koranne versus State, Court, State, Kramonnati, Kramonnati, Teachers of Education Department, Tribal Welfare Department, Government, Kramonnati, the General Administration Department, the State Government, Court
GPE: Smt, Smt, Kramonnati, Smt, Kramonnati, K.K.Trivedi
DATE: 26.04.2007, 26.05.2008, 21/03/1983 19/4/1999, 21/03/1983, three months, 21/03/1983, the period of 6 months, today, a period of, two months, two months
CARDINAL: one, 17
PERCENT: 6%, 9%