Sonu Malviya vs State Of M.P.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:6323
1 WP-6764-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE JAI KUMAR PILLAI
th
ON THE 10 OF MARCH, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 6764 of 2026
SONU MALVIYA
Versus
STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Ms. Prachi Bansal - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Sudeep Bhargav - Deputy Advocate General appearing on behalf
of Advocate General/respondents/State.
ORDER
This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs :-
"7.1 This petition may kindly be allowed with costs.

7.2 This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue any writ, order or
direction in the nature of the certiorari or any other appropriate
writ thereby quashing and setting aside (ANNEXURE P/1) the
impugned order dated 23.12.2025 passed by Deputy
Commissioner of Police Headquarter Indore.

7.3 This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue any writ, order or
direction in the nature of the Mandamus or any other appropriate
writ and the respondents may kindly be directed to provide
advance increment benefit as per the circular to the Petitioner
from the date of his entitlement i.e. from the date of his
appointment dated 05.03.2011.

7.4 Issue such other orders, writ, direction as this Hon’ble
Court deems fit in the interest of justice in favor of Petitioner."
2 . It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner is challenging the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JAGADISHAN
AIYER
Signing time: 11-03-2026
17:37:20

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:6323
2 WP-6764-2026
order passed by Deputy Commissioner of Police / Res. 4 on 23.12.2025

whereby the representation submitted by the petitioner in respect of
providing the advance increment benefit to the petitioner in connection to
family welfare scheme (Nasbandi Programme) initiated by government for
government employees has been rejected without considering the order
passed by this Hon’ble Court in the case of Gori Saxena Vs The State of
Madhya Pradesh Directorate Ayush and Ors. in WP No.28689/2022 . The
Petitioner was appointed on the post of Constable at GRP Police Office
Indore on 05.03.2011. The wife of the Petitioner despite undergoing the
tubectomy surgery from government hospital /Health and Family Welfare
Centre Dhar on 11.11.2008 has not been granted the benefit of advance
increment.
3 . Counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to
circular dated 25.7.2022 which clearly provides that to promote the family
planning the Government is providing advance increment to the person who
agrees for vesctomy/tubectomy (Nasbandi). It is further submitted that even
assuming that the petitioner was granted advance increment on account of
wrong interpretation of the aforesaid circular, the amount cannot be
recovered after a period of 13 years as there is no suppression of facts by the
petitioner.
4 . In support of her submission, counsel for the petitioner has also
drawn the attention of this Court to the decision rendered by the Supreme
Court in the case of Thomas Daniel Vs. State of Kerala and others reported
as 2022 SCC online SC 536.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JAGADISHAN
AIYER
Signing time: 11-03-2026
17:37:20

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:6323
3 WP-6764-2026
5 . Counsel for the respondent/State on the other hand has opposed

the prayer, and it is submitted that it was a precondition in the aforesaid
circular that such person, who has got himself/herself operated upon should
be a public servant at the time operation, and has also relied upon circular
dated 14.9.2006.
6 . On perusal of the aforesaid circular dated 14.09.2006, and the
subsequent demand raised by the respondents, this Court is of the considered
opinion that the aforesaid circular has been issued by the State Government
only to promote its family planning programme, and in such circumstances,
if a person who has already taken steps for the family planning by resorting
to Nasbandi prior to his appointment, and is subsequently appointed in the
government service, cannot be said not to promote the the government’s
family planning programme.
7 . This court is of the considered opinion that if a public spirited
person, regardless of the fact whether he is a government servant or not,
unselfishly gets himself/herself operated upon for family planning, such
person cannot be deprived of the benefit of the aforesaid circular which
provides for advance increments to government servants opting for family
planning. This is for the reason that the ultimate object of the government is
to control the birth rate and the explosion of population by resorting to
family planning only, and if a person has contributed to the same cause while
he/she was not in government service and subsequently joins the same,
he/she is also entitled to the benefit of his/her benevolent act of helping the
government in the retiral clause.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JAGADISHAN
AIYER
Signing time: 11-03-2026
17:37:20

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:6323
4 WP-6764-2026
8 . In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court has

no hesitation to come to a conclusion that the impugned order dated
23.12.2025 cannot be sustained in the eyes of the law, deserve to be and are
hereby quashed.
9. Accordingly, the petition stands allowed and disposed of.
C.C. as per rules.
(JAI KUMAR PILLAI)
JUDGE
Aiyer

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JAGADISHAN
AIYER
Signing time: 11-03-2026
17:37:20