Kaptan Singh Thakur vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:32769
1 WP-44610-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND SINGH BAHRAWAT
th
ON THE 27 OF OCTOBER, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 44610 of 2026
CNR No.: MPHC030298612026
KAPTAN SINGH THAKUR
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Nirmal Sharma - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri G K Agrawal - Government Advocate for respondents/State.
ORDER
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been
filed seeking the following reliefs:-
"i-Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus whereby directing
the Respondents No 1 to 4 to give the benefit of payscale of
515-800 w.e.f. 01.04.1982, the benefit of payscale of 950-
1530 w.e.f 01.01.1986 and benefit of payscale of 3050-4590
w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and subsequent revised payscales to the
present Petitioner in the interest of justice.

ii-That cost of the litigation may also kindly be awarded to
the petitioner.

Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the
facts and circumstances of the case same may kindly be
granted to the petitioner."
2. The petitioner, being a retired Time Keeper from the respondent
department, has approached this Court seeking grant of the benefit of the
appropriate pay scale in the light of the order passed by the Coordinate
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ABHISHEK
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 10/27/2026
5:42:40 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:32769
2 WP-44610-2026
Bench of this Court, Principal Seat at Jabalpur, in the case of A.L. Thakur

and others vs. the State of M.P. and others in W.P.No.16054/2003, which,
according to the petitioner, has been confirmed up to the Apex Court.
Similar benefit has also been granted in the case of R.K.Lakhera and Others
vs. State of M.P. and Others in W.P.No.13540/2010.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the
Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 11.07.2023 passed in
W.P.No.26326/2019 (Bipin Kumar Bansal vs. the State of M.P. and others) ,
has allowed the writ petition by placing reliance on the orders passed in the
case of A.L. Thakur (supra) and R.K.Lakhera (supra). He submits that the
petitioner would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondent
authorities to decide his claim in the light of the order dated 11.07.2023
passed in W.P.No.26326/2019; Bipin Kumar Bansal (supra) in a time bound
manner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that an identical
petition, W.P. No. 18054/2026 (Sandeep Vishwakarma v. State of M.P.) , has
already been disposed of by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order
dated 15.05.2026. It is submitted that since the Coordinate Bench has already
directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner therein, the
present petition may also be disposed of on the same terms and conditions by
maintaining parity.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the judgment
in A.L. Thakur (supra) was passed on the basis of the judgment in Laxmi
Narayan Upadhyay v. State of M.P. rendered in T.A. No. 995/1998 by the
State Administrative Tribunal. It is further submitted that against the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ABHISHEK
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 10/27/2026
5:42:40 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:32769
3 WP-44610-2026
judgment in Laxmi Narayan Upadhyay (supra), Writ Petition No. 945/2001

was preferred by the State of M.P. before the Division Bench of this Court,
which was allowed vide order dated 2.2.2006. Therefore, the judgment
passed in A.L. Thakur (supra) is not applicable to the facts of the present
case. He further relied upon the order passed in the case of Parmanand
Kushwah Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others [W.P. No.329/2021,
decided on 21.07.2025 (Gwalior)].
5. In view of the above submissions, the present writ petition stands
disposed of with a direction that on the petitioner submitting a copy of the
order passed today in the present writ petition alongwith the memo of
petition and annexures before respondent No.2, together with a fresh
representation within a period of two weeks from today, respondent No.2
shall dwell upon the same and pass appropriate order taking into
consideration the order passed in the identical matter namely Bipin Kumar
Bansal (supra), and other similarly situated persons. The Competent
authority is also directed to consider the representation of petitioner in the
light of A.L. Thakur (supra) and Writ Petition No. 945/2001 preferred by the
State of M.P. before the Division Bench of this Court, which was allowed
vide order dated 2.2.2006 and also in W.P. No.329/2021 (Parmanand
Kushwah Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.).
6. Let the said exercise be completed within a period of 90 days
thereafter. In case, the claim of the petitioner is found to be at par with
persons similarly situated, then the benefit be also extended to him for the
same period.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ABHISHEK
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 10/27/2026
5:42:40 PM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:32769
4 WP-44610-2026
7. Needless to emphasize that this Court has not examined the merits

of the claim made by the petitioner, and it shall be open for the respondent
No.2 to consider and decide the representation strictly in accordance with
law.
8. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
9. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand closed.
(ANAND SINGH BAHRAWAT)
JUDGE
Abhi

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ABHISHEK
CHATURVEDI
Signing time: 10/27/2026
5:42:40 PM