Madhya Pradesh High Court asks State Cabinet to look into victimisation of lower-rung employees by bureaucrats

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently called upon the State Cabinet to look into the victimization of lower-rung employees by bureaucrats and other senior officials [The State of Madhya Pradesh v Balwant Singh Mandloi]..A Division Bench of Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Gajendra Singh observed that the Court has come across various cases where Class-IV employees are adversely affected by the decisions taken by the superior officers.“Most of the cases are of the nature of withdrawal of the pay scale upgradation, recovery at the time of retirement and non-grant of similar benefits to remaining employees and delay in promotion etc. We have not come across any cases in which Class – I & II officers are approaching this High Court in these types of litigation. Therefore, the Cabinet of ministers should consider why Class – III and IV employees are being victimized of the wrong and adamant approach of higher officials of the concerned Department so that harassment of the Class – III & IV employees and wasting the valuable time of the Court can be avoided,” the Bench said..The Court added that the State government had framed a Litigation Policy in 2018 to tackle such small matters but has failed to implement the same.“The State Government has framed a Litigation Policy in the year 2018, but we have not come across any of the matters, in which such policy was applied. In the said policy, there is a provision for the constitution of State and District Level Committee, Department-wise Committee to settle petty disputes but till today they are not liable to come to this High Court. It appears that the said policy is lying in the files and gathering dust,” it said. .The Court was hearing an application moved by the State government against a single-judge’s decision to quash recovery of an amount of ₹94,056 from a retired class-IV employee.The appeal was filed after a delay of 711 days. The Court refused to condone the delay, observing since the entitlement of the employee was not in dispute, the State has no ground in writ appeal. “Secondly, with the consent of the Government Advocate appearing for the State, the writ petition was allowed on the very first date of hearing. At that time, the Government Advocate did not seek any time to file reply to the writ petition. Hence, the State has no right to file the writ appeal before this Court,” it added..The Court had earlier sought to know who had given the permission for filing the appeal. Having looked at the record, the Court said,“We are shocked and surprised that neither the office of the Advocate General nor the Law Department granted any approval for filing this writ appeal, despite that the Chief Engineer, PHE, Bhopal vide order dated 16.12.2024 appointed the OIC and directed him to file this writ appeal. No reasons have been assigned as to why the Chief Engineer thought that this matter is fit for filing a writ appeal before this Court. There is no explanation as to how this writ appeal can be entertained on merit that too with an unexplained delay of 711 days. The present writ appeal has been filed by wasting the public money only and to waste the valuable time of this Court.”.Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal with a cost of ₹20,000 to be recovered from the Chief Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Bhopal who had given the opinion to file the appeal “without examining the facts and law involved in this case.”Additional Advocate General Anand Soni represented the State..[Read Judgment]