Shivkumar Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
1 WP. No.25690 of 2026
THE IN HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT G WA L I O R
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND SINGH BAHRAWAT
WRIT PETITION No. 25690 of 2026
SHIVKUMAR SHARMA
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri D.P. Singh - Advocate for petitioner.
Shri K.S. Tomar- Government Advocate for respondent/State.
Shri Raj Bahadur Singh Tomar- Advocate for respondent No.7.
Reserved on : 07.09.2026
Pronounced on : 15.10.2026
___________________________________________________________________
ORDER
This petition, under Article 226 of Constitution of India, has been filed
seeking the following relief (s): -
“i) That, the order impugned dated 30.06.2026 passed by the
Respondent no.2 and 3 contained in Annexure - P/1 whereby the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
2 WP. No.25690 of 2026
Respondent no. 7 has been transferred at the place of the petitioner,
may kindly be quashed, in the interest of justice.
ii) Cost of the petition be awarded or any other order оr direction
deemed fit in the circumstances of the case be issued in the favour of
the petitioner.”
2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially
appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade-II on 12.02.1999 and was thereafter absorbed
in the corresponding teaching cadre. Under the Madhya Pradesh School
Education (Teaching Cadre) Service Conditions and Recruitment Rules, 2018,
the petitioner is presently working as Upper Division Teacher/Khelkud Shikshak
and, being senior-most in the relevant cadre of Physical Training Instructors, was
rightly entrusted with the additional charge of District Sports Inspector/Officer
vide order dated 02.05.2025.
3. It is contended that the Directorate of Public Instructions had issued
successive instructions dated 05.12.2001, 16.07.2008 and 26.08.2020 specifically
providing that, against a vacant post of District Sports Inspector/Officer, the
charge is to be entrusted to the senior-most PTI. The petitioner, being senior to
respondent No.7 in the relevant cadre and having been appointed on the higher
post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-II/PTI, was therefore lawfully holding the said
charge.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner further submits that respondent No.7 has
sought to rely upon a gradation list pertaining to PTIs working in the
minimum/lower pay scale, in which his name appears at Serial No.135. The said
gradation list is wholly inapplicable to the petitioner, as the petitioner belongs to
the higher cadre/pay scale and, consequently, his name does not figure in the said
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
3 WP. No.25690 of 2026
list. The respondent cannot claim seniority over the petitioner by relying upon a
gradation list of a different/lower cadre.
5. It is further submitted that the State Government, by notification dated
17.04.1998, had clarified the channel and nature of the post of Physical Training
Instructor Grade-II and provided for appointment/posting against the post of
Sports Director/Sports Officer/Sports Inspector. Thus, the petitioner, having
initially entered service as Shiksha Karmi Grade-II (Vyayam/PTI), has
throughout remained in the higher cadre and is senior to respondent No.7, whose
initial appointment was on the post of Assistant Teacher and who subsequently
came to be appointed/promoted as PTI in the lower scale.
6. Learned counsel for petitioner also submits that the impugned order dated
30.06.2026 does not constitute a genuine transfer of the petitioner, nor has the
petitioner been transferred from the District. Rather, respondent No.7 has been
posted/adjusted against the very post over which the petitioner was already
holding charge, without first displacing or transferring the petitioner. Such an
action is contrary to the departmental instructions governing the entrustment of
charge of the District Sports Inspector/Officer and has adversely affected the
petitioner's accrued rights.
7. It is further contended by learned counsel for petitioner that the
Government's Transfer Policy dated 22.05.2026 imposed a ban on transfers after
16.06.2026 except in administrative exigency or exceptional circumstances. The
impugned order dated 30.06.2026, whereby respondent No.7 has been
accommodated against the post held by the petitioner without any corresponding
transfer of the petitioner, cannot be justified merely as an administrative
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
4 WP. No.25690 of 2026
arrangement, particularly when the departmental instructions require the charge
to be entrusted to the senior-most eligible PTI.
8. Learned counsel further submits that the plea of respondent No.7 that the
petitioner is merely holding an informal/local additional charge is misconceived.
The petitioner's entitlement to hold the district-level charge flows from the
departmental instructions and the notification dated 17.04.1998, and the fact that
his salary continues to be drawn from his parent institution does not extinguish
his right to hold the charge lawfully entrusted to him.
9. It is contended that respondent No.7 has incorrectly relied upon the
gradation list of lower-scale PTIs and has thereby attempted to project himself as
senior to the petitioner. The service records and relevant appointment/absorption
documents demonstrate that the petitioner belongs to the higher cadre and is
senior to respondent No.7 in the relevant hierarchy. Therefore, respondent No.7
could not have been accommodated against the district-level charge by ignoring
the petitioner's seniority and the applicable departmental instructions.
10. Learned counsel also submits that the subsequent
proposal/recommendation dated 10.07.2026 concerning promotion of eligible
Middle School Teachers (Sports) further demonstrates that the petitioner belongs
to the relevant higher cadre and that his claim cannot be equated with that of
respondent No.7, who belongs to the lower cadre/pay-scale.
11. Lastly, it is submitted that the impugned order dated 30.06.2026 has been
issued merely to accommodate respondent No.7, without lawfully disturbing the
petitioner's existing charge and in disregard of the applicable departmental
instructions. The action of the respondents is therefore arbitrary, contrary to the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
5 WP. No.25690 of 2026
governing instructions and amounts to an impermissible exercise of
administrative power. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 30.06.2026
deserves to be quashed and the petitioner's right to continue on the district-level
charge deserves to be protected.
12. Per contra , learned counsel for respondent No.7 submits that the petitioner
has no locus or cause of action to challenge the impugned order dated
30.06.2026, whereby respondent No.7 has been posted as In-charge District
Sports and Welfare Inspector, District Bhind, as the petitioner has no substantive
right to claim the said charge. It is submitted that the petitioner is working on the
post of Khelkud Shikshak and was absorbed on the said post vide order dated
19.11.2019 under the Madhya Pradesh State School Education Services,
Academic Cadre (Service Condition and Recruitment Rules), 2018, and his
seniority is required to be reckoned in the cadre of Khelkud Shikshak w.e.f.
01.07.2018. On the other hand, respondent No.7 was appointed as Assistant
Teacher on 11.02.1989 and was promoted as Physical Trained Instructor on
06.10.2009. The post of Physical Trained Instructor is distinct from the post of
Khelkud Shikshak and the seniority of Physical Trained Instructors is maintained
at the State level. It is further submitted that under the Madhya Pradesh Non-
Gazetted Class III Academic Services (Non-Collegiate Services) Recruitment
and Promotion Rules, 1973, as amended vide notification dated 18.10.1984, the
post of Physical Trained Instructor (Lower Pay Scale) has the promotional
channel to the post of District Sports and Welfare Inspector. However, under the
2018 Rules governing the petitioner, there is no promotional channel from the
post of Khelkud Shikshak to the post of District Sports and Welfare Inspector, the
post of Khelkud Shikshak being a dying cadre. Learned counsel submits that the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
6 WP. No.25690 of 2026
departmental orders and circulars relied upon by the petitioner themselves
demonstrate that, on the vacancy of the post of District Sports and Welfare
Inspector, the charge is required to be entrusted to the eligible/senior-most
Physical Trained Instructor. Respondent No.7 being the senior-most Physical
Trained Instructor in District Bhind, his appointment as In-charge District Sports
and Welfare Inspector is in accordance with the applicable rules and departmental
instructions. It is also submitted that the petitioner was not substantively posted
on the post of District Sports and Welfare Inspector and was merely holding
additional charge pursuant to the order dated 02.05.2025 passed by the Collector
at the local level. His substantive posting continues at Government Higher
Secondary School, Manepura, Block Ater, District Bhind, from where he is
drawing his salary. There is no sanctioned post of PTI Block Sports Officer under
the applicable rules. It is further submitted that respondent No.7 is senior to the
petitioner in the relevant cadre and his pay scale as Physical Trained Instructor is
higher than that of Khelkud Shikshak (B). The petitioner has deliberately not
placed the relevant seniority list on record. Since the petitioner has no
promotional channel to the post of District Sports and Welfare Inspector under
the 2018 Rules, he cannot claim entitlement to the said post indirectly by virtue
of having been entrusted with its additional charge. As regards the contention
regarding the transfer ban, learned counsel submits that the School Education
Department has its own policy dated 06.06.2026, under which transfers/postings
were permissible up to 30.06.2026. Therefore, the general policy dated
22.05.2026 relied upon by the petitioner is not applicable to the impugned order
dated 30.06.2026. Respondent No.7 duly joined pursuant to the impugned order
on 01.07.2026. Learned counsel further submits that the impugned order was
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
7 WP. No.25690 of 2026
issued by the competent authority at the State level, whereas the petitioner was
holding charge only at the district/local level. The order passed by the higher
competent authority, therefore, prevails. Moreover, an incumbent holding an in-
charge/additional charge arrangement has no substantive right to continue on
such post. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in State of Haryana v. S.M. Sharma And Others, reported in AIR 1993 SC
2273 , and the judgments of this Court in WP. No.21469/2022 [Smt. Mamta
Soni Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh And Others] decided on 22.09.2022 and
W.P. No.16675/2026 [Dr. Sonesh Poonia Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh
And Others] decided on 11.05.2026 , in support of the proposition that no
substantive right accrues in favour of a person merely because he has been
holding charge of a post. On the aforesaid grounds, learned counsel submits that
the petitioner has failed to establish any enforceable right or cause of action
against the impugned order and, therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed.
13. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State submits that the writ
petition is misconceived, devoid of merit and liable to be dismissed, as the
petitioner has failed to establish violation of any statutory provision or
infringement of any legally enforceable right. It is submitted that the petitioner
was merely entrusted with temporary additional charge of the vacant post of
District Sports and Welfare Officer vide order dated 02.05.2025 as a stop-gap
arrangement and was never substantively appointed or promoted to the said post.
Mere entrustment of additional charge does not confer any vested or enforceable
right upon the incumbent to continue on such charge. It is further submitted that
the impugned order dated 30.06.2026 has been issued in accordance with the
Circular dated 26.08.2020 issued by the Directorate of Public Instruction,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
8 WP. No.25690 of 2026
Government of Madhya Pradesh, which provides that in the event of vacancy on
the post of District Sports and Welfare Officer, the senior-most Physical Training
Instructor (Vyayam Nirdeshak) of the concerned district shall be assigned the
said charge. Respondent No.7, being the senior-most eligible Physical Training
Instructor in District Bhind, has accordingly been assigned the charge in
accordance with the aforesaid Government instructions. Thus, the impugned
order is legal, valid and in conformity with the departmental policy. Learned
counsel further submits that the petitioner has no vested or indefeasible right to
continue at a particular place or to retain an additional charge, and the competent
authority is fully empowered to make appropriate administrative arrangements in
the interest of administration. Transfer, posting and deployment are incidents of
service and ordinarily fall within the domain of the employer. It is submitted that
the allegations of mala fides and favouritism are vague, baseless and unsupported
by any material particulars. The petitioner has neither pleaded nor established
any personal bias or animus on the part of the competent authority. Mere bald
allegations of mala fides cannot furnish a ground for interference under Article
226 of the Constitution. It is further submitted that the contention regarding
respondent No.7 being junior to the petitioner is of no consequence, as
respondent No.7 has not been substantively appointed or promoted to the post in
question but has merely been assigned the duties/charge pursuant to the
Government Circular dated 26.08.2020 so that the functioning of the office does
not suffer on account of the vacancy. As regards the alleged violation of the
transfer-ban period, learned counsel submits that the impugned order is not a
routine transfer but an administrative arrangement made pursuant to the
departmental instructions for ensuring proper functioning of the vacant post.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
9 WP. No.25690 of 2026
Consequently, the transfer policy or transfer-ban period has no application to the
present arrangement. Lastly, it is submitted that executive instructions or transfer
policies do not confer any enforceable legal right upon a Government employee.
In the absence of violation of any statutory rule or legally protected right, no
interference under Article 226 of the Constitution is warranted. The writ petition,
therefore, deserves to be dismissed.
14. No other point is pressed by learned counsel for the parties.
15. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
16. The short question which arises for consideration is whether the petitioner
has any enforceable right to continue on the post of District Sports and Welfare
Inspector merely on the strength of the fact that he was earlier entrusted with the
additional charge of the said post.
17. The record reflects that the petitioner was not substantively appointed or
promoted to the post of District Sports and Welfare Inspector. The charge was
entrusted to him as an additional arrangement. Such entrustment of additional
charge, by itself, does not confer any substantive or vested right upon the
incumbent to continue on the said post indefinitely.
18. It is also evident from the record that the competent authority has
subsequently made an administrative arrangement by assigning the charge of the
vacant post to respondent No.7. The said arrangement has been made in terms of
the departmental instructions governing entrustment of charge of the post in
question.
19. The petitioner has not been able to demonstrate any statutory provision
conferring upon him a right to continue on the additional charge or restricting the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
10 WP. No.25690 of 2026
competent authority from making a fresh arrangement in respect of the vacant
post. The mere fact that the petitioner had earlier discharged the duties of the post
cannot create an indefeasible right in his favour.
20. So far as the plea relating to the transfer policy is concerned, the impugned
order does not amount to substantive transfer of the petitioner from his cadre or
post. The order essentially concerns the arrangement of the vacant post of
District Sports and Welfare Inspector. Therefore, the petitioner cannot claim
continuation on the additional charge merely by relying upon the provisions of
the general transfer policy. The respondents have also specifically treated the
impugned order as an administrative arrangement and not as a routine transfer.
21. It is a settled principle that an employee holding an additional or in-charge
arrangement does not acquire a substantive right to continue on such post.
Administrative arrangements concerning a vacant post are ordinarily within the
domain of the competent authority, unless the action is shown to be contrary to a
statutory provision or otherwise legally unsustainable.
22. The grant and taking away of additional charge does not deprive the person
concerned of any substantive right so long as the service conditions attached to
the post held substantively by the said person are not adversely effected.
Additional charge is a temporary and adhoc arrangement made to cater to an
emergent eventuality of casual vacancy etc. having no connection with the
substantive post.
23. Law does not give any right to seek additional charge and correspondingly
there is no infringement of any right when such additional charge is taken away.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
11 WP. No.25690 of 2026
The Supreme Court in the case of S.M. Sharma And Others (supra) has held
has under:-
''9. It is only a posting order in respect of two officers. With the
posting of Ram Niwas as Executive Engineer Sharma was
automatically relieved of the current duty charge (if the post of
Executive Engineer. Sharma was neither
appointed/promoted/posted as Executive Engineer nor was he ever
reverted from the said post. He was only holding current duty
charge of the post of Executive Engineer. The Chief Administrator
never promoted Sharma to the post of Executive Engineer and as
such the question of his reversion from the said post did not arise.
Under the circumstances the controversy whether the powers of the
Board to appoint/promote a person to the post of an Executive
Engineer were delegated to the chairman or to the chief
Administrator. Is wholly irrelevant.
10. Sharma was given the current duty charge of the post of
Executive Engineer under the orders of the Chief Administrator and
the said charge was also withdrawn by the same authority. We have
already reproduced above Rule 4(2) of the General Rules and Rule
13 of the Service Rules. We are of the view that the Chief
Administrator, in the facts and circumstances of this case. was
within his powers to issue the two orders dated June 13. 1991 and
January 6, 1992.
''11. We are constrained to say that the High Court extended its
extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India to a frivolity. No one has a right to ask for or stick to a
current duty charge. The impugned order did not cause any
financial loss or prejudice of any kind to Sharma. He had no cause
of action whatsoever to invoke the writ jurisdiction of the High
Court. It was a patient misuse of the process of the Court ''
24. The Supreme Court in the case of Ramakant Shripad Sinai Advalpalkar
vs. Union of India and Others, reported in 1991 Supp (2) SCC 733 has held as
under:-
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
12 WP. No.25690 of 2026
''5. The arrangements contemplated by this order plainly do not
amount to a promotion of the appellant to the post of Treasurer. The
distinction between a situation where a government servant is
promoted to a higher post and one where he is merely asked to
discharge the duties of the higher post is too clear to require any
reiteration. Asking an officer who substantially holds a lower post
merely to discharge the duties of a higher post cannot be treated as
a promotion. In such a case he does not get the salary of the higher
post; but gets only what in service parlance is called a ''charge
allowance''. Such situations are contemplated where exigencies of
public service necessitate such arrangements and even
consideration of seniority do not enter into it. The person continues
to hold his substantive lower post and only discharges the duties of
the higher post essentially as a stop-gap arrangement.''
25. It is also useful to refer to the law laid down by this Court in the cases
relating to appointment of In-charge Chief Municipal Officers. In Sanjay Soni v.
State of M.P., W.P. No.5135/2012, decided on 03.10.2013 , this Court held that
an in-charge arrangement cannot be made de hors the Rules and that, where a
regular incumbent is not available, the charge should be given only to a person
holding a substantive post in the feeder cadre for regular promotion. The same
principle was followed in Mahesh Prasad Dixit v. State of M.P., W.P.
No.15111/2020, decided on 09.10.2020 , wherein this Court held that a person
has no right to continue on an in-charge post merely because he was earlier given
such charge. The Supreme Court, in S.M. Sharma And Others (supra) , has also
held that a person holding only the current duty charge of a post does not acquire
any right to continue on that post when the competent authority makes another
posting. Applying the same principle to the present case, the petitioner cannot
claim continuation merely because he was earlier entrusted with the charge of
District Sports and Welfare Inspector. If a regular incumbent is not available, the
charge can be entrusted by the competent authority to an eligible person
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
13 WP. No.25690 of 2026
belonging to the feeder cadre and falling within the zone of consideration. The
petitioner has not established any right under the applicable rules to insist that the
charge must continue with him. Therefore, the subsequent assignment of charge
to respondent No.7, who is stated to be an eligible person from the relevant
feeder cadre, does not call for interference. Order dated 19.11.2019 issued by
Joint Director, Public Instructions Division, Gwalior, M.P. is quoted below for
ready reference and convenience:
dk;kZy; la;qDr lapkyd] yksd f'k{k.k
laHkkx & Gwalior ] e/;izns'k
Ø-@fo'ks"k lsy@v/;k-izdks"B@fu;qfDRk@2018@102968 fnukad% 19@11@2019
%% vkns'k %%
e/;çns'k jkT; Ldwy f'k{kk lsok 'kS{kf.kd laoxZ] ¼lsok 'krsZ ,oa HkrhZ fu;e] 2018 ds
fu;e 4 ,oa 5 esa mYysf[kr çko/kku vuqlkj Ldwy f'k{kk foHkkx dh 'kkykvksa esa fuEu rkfydk
ds d‚ye Ø- 3 ,oa 4 esa mYysf[kr ,oa dk;Zjr LFkkuh; fudk; ds dks [ksydwn f'k{kd
¼Js.kh&c½ ds in ij fu;qä djrs gq, rkfydk ds dkWye Ø- 5 esa mYysf[kr laLFkk esa inLFk
fd;k tkrk gS %&
Ø- ;wfud vkbZ-Mh- Ukke orZeku in LFkkiuk fo"k; HkrhZ fu;e 2018
v/khu fu;qfDr
mijkar inLFkkiuk
laLFkk dk uke o
MkbZl dksM
¼1½ ¼2½ ¼3½ ¼4½ ¼5½ ¼6½
1180525 BG8295 SHIV
KUMAR
SHARMA
HSS Manepura
HSS Manepura
[23030600505] -
[23030600505]
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
14 WP. No.25690 of 2026
ftyk - fHk.M - ftyk - fHk.M
1180526 BG7689 AWADH
NARAYAN
KHEMARIA
GHS Babedi
GHS Babedi
[23030416715]
[ 23030416715 ]
– ftyk - fHk.M
- -
ftyk fHk.M
mijkar fu;qfä e/;çns'k jkT; Ldwy f'k{kk lsok ¼'kS{kf.kd laoxZ½] lsok 'krsZ ,oa HkrhZ
fu;e] 2018 esa fufgr çko/kkuksa ds v/;/khu fnukad 01&07&2018 ls ekU; gksxhA fu;qä fd;s
x, yksd lsodksa dks fnukad 01&07&2018 dh fLFkfr esa mUgsa çkIr NBOkas osrueku ds led{k
lkrosa osrueku esa fu;ekuqlkj osru ,oa Hkrs ns; gksaxs A
;g fu;qfä ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; esa çpfyr ;kfpdk Øekad 21608@2018 rFkk
;kfpdk Øekad 22421@2018 esa ikfjr vafre fu.kZ; ds v/;/khu gksxhA
la;qDr lapkyd] Ykksd f'k{k.k
laHkkx & Gwalior ] e/;izns'k
26. It is also relevant to notice the order dated 19.11.2019 issued by the Joint
Director, Public Instruction, Gwalior, whereby the petitioner was
appointed/placed as Khelkud Shikshak ( ) under the Madhya Pradesh State
Js.kh&c
School Education Service (Academic Cadre), Service Conditions and
Recruitment Rules, 2018, and was posted at Government Higher Secondary
School, Manepura, District Bhind. The said document clearly shows that the
petitioner's substantive post is that of Khelkud Shikshak under the 2018 Rules.
Therefore, merely because the petitioner was subsequently given additional
charge of District Sports and Welfare Inspector, his substantive cadre cannot be
treated as that of Physical Training Instructor. The distinction assumes
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
15 WP. No.25690 of 2026
significance because the post of District Sports and Welfare Inspector is to be
manned, in the absence of a regular incumbent, by an eligible person from the
prescribed feeder cadre and within the zone of consideration. The petitioner has
not demonstrated from the 2018 Rules any promotional channel from the post of
Khelkud Shikshak to the post of District Sports and Welfare Inspector.
Consequently, his earlier entrustment with additional charge cannot create a right
in his favour to continue on the said post.
27. The order dated 06.10.2023 issued by the Directorate of Public Instruction
also assumes significance. The said order, issued with reference to the Madhya
Pradesh Non-Gazetted Class III Academic Services (Non-Collegiate Services)
Recruitment Rules, 1973, concerns the arrangement of persons holding the post
of Vyayam Nirdeshak against higher-level posts carrying the higher pay scale.
This document indicates that the department has treated the cadre of Vyayam
Nirdeshak as the relevant cadre for such higher posts. In contrast, the petitioner,
as is evident from the order dated 19.11.2019, is substantively holding the post of
Khelkud Shikshak under the 2018 Rules. Therefore, the petitioner's claim cannot
be decided merely on the basis of his earlier date of appointment or his having
once held additional charge. The relevant consideration is whether he belongs to
the feeder cadre prescribed for the post in question. Where a regular incumbent is
not available, the charge can be entrusted to an eligible person belonging to the
feeder cadre and falling within the zone of consideration. Mere earlier
entrustment of charge to the petitioner cannot confer upon him a right to continue
against a post for which he has not established the requisite cadre-based
entitlement. Schedule IV of amended Madhya Pradesh Non-Gazetted Class III
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
16 WP. No.25690 of 2026
Academic Services (Non-Collegiate Services) Recruitment Rules, 1973 goes as
under:
vuqlwph Øekad 4 ds Øekad 5 ,oa 6 esa orZeku esa fLFkr izko/kku ds LFkku ij fuEufyf[kr
izfrLFkkfir fd;k tk;%&
foHkkx dk uke ml lsok vFkok in
la?k lsok vFkok
in dk uke ftl
inksUufr gsrq
foHkkxh; inksUufr ds
dk uke ftlls
inksUufr dh tkuh gS
fu/kkZfjr
vgZrk,a ,oa vuqHko
lnL;
ij inksUufr dh
tkuh gS
¼1½ ¼2½ ¼3½ ¼4½ ¼5½
f'k{kk foHkkx ¼v½ O;k;ke funsZf'kd
¼mPp osrueku½
vegkfo|ky;
O;k[;krk 'kkjhfjd
f'k{kk egkfo|ky;
1-'kkjhfjd f'k{kk esa
Lukrd mikf/k
vFkok fMIyksek
1- lapkyd] yksd
f'k{k.k &v/;{k
2- laHkkxh; f'k{kk
v/kh{kd &lnL;
¼c½ ftyk dzhM+k ,oa
dY;k.k fujh{kd
2- 'kkjhfjd f'k{kk
dk 5 o"kZ dk
vuqHko
3- izkpk;Z] 'kkjhfjd
f'k{kk egkfo|ky;&
lnL;-
4- mi lapkyd
'kkjhfjd f'k{kk
lnL;& lfpo-
O;k;ke funsZ'kd ¼fuEu
osrueku½
¼v½ O;k;ke
funsZ'kd ¼mPp
osrueku½
Lukrd mikf/k
rFkk 'kkjhfjd
f'k{kk esa fMIyksek]
rhu o"kZ dk
vuqHko
1- lapkyd] yksd
f'k{k.k }kjk euksuhr
vf/kdkjh &v/;{k
¼c½ ftyk
ØhMk ,oa dY;k.k
fujh{kd
2- laHkkxh; f'k{kk
v/kh{kd &lnL;
3- izkpk;Z] 'kkjhfjd
f'k{kk egkfo|
ky;& lnL;
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
17 WP. No.25690 of 2026
4- mi lapkyd]
'kkjhfjd f'k{kk&&
lnL;&lfpo
4. For entries at S.No.5 and 6 in Schedule No.4 the following entries shall be
substituted, namely:-
SCHEDULE IV
Name of the
Department
Name of the
Service or the
post from
which the
promotion is to
be made
Name of the
Union Service
or the post to
which
promotion is to
be made
Qualification
s and
Experience
prescribed
for
promotion
Members of the
Departmental
Promotion
Committee
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Education
Department
(Non-
Collegiate)
(A) physical
Training
Instructor
(Higher Pay
Scale)
Lecturer
Sharirik
Shiksha
Mahavidyalaya
1. Bachelor's
Degree or
Diploma in
Physical
Training.
1. Director of
Public Instruction
– President.
2. Divisional
Superintendent of
Education –
member
(2) District
Sports and
Welfare
Instructor.
2.
Experience
of 5 years in
imparting
physical
training
3. Principal
Sharirik Shiksha
Mahavidyalaya-
Member
4. Deputy Director
Physical Training
– Member-
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
18 WP. No.25690 of 2026
Secretary.
'' Physical
Training
Instructor
(Lower Pay
Scale)
(A) Physical
Training
Instructor
(Higher Pay
Scale)
Bachelor's
Degree and
Diploma in
Physical
Training.
1. Any Officer
nominated by the
Director of Public
Instruction-
Chairman
(B) District
Sports and
Welfare
Inspector
Along with
and
experience
of three
years
2. Divisional
Superintendent of
Education –
Member
3. Principal
Sharirik Shiksha
Mahavidyalaya –
Member.
4. Deputy Director
Physical Training
– Member -
Secretary
28. The contention of the petitioner that he belongs to a different and higher
cadre and, therefore, respondent No. 7 cannot be assigned the charge of District
Sports and Welfare Inspector is not acceptable. The notification dated
18.10.1984, amending the Madhya Pradesh Non-Gazetted Class III Academic
Services (Non-Collegiate Services) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 1973,
prescribes the service structure for the posts of Physical Training Instructor and
District Sports and Welfare Inspector. The said notification, read with the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:31836
19 WP. No.25690 of 2026
departmental circular dated 26.08.2020, supports the contention of respondent
No.7 that the charge of District Sports and Welfare Inspector is to be entrusted to
the senior-most eligible PTI of the concerned district. Merely because the
petitioner was earlier entrusted with the additional charge of the said post, he
cannot claim precedence over respondent No.7, particularly when the petitioner
is working as Khelkud Shikshak under the 2018 Rules and has not established his
entitlement to the said charge under the applicable instructions. Thus, the
petitioner's claim based on his alleged seniority in a different cadre does not, by
itself, confer any enforceable right to retain the additional charge in preference to
respondent No.7.
29. In the present case, no violation of any statutory rule has been established.
The petitioner has also failed to establish any legally enforceable right in his
favour which could warrant interference with the impugned order in exercise of
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
30. Consequently, no ground for interference is made out. The writ petition is,
accordingly, dismissed .
No order as to costs.
(Anand Singh Bahrawat)
Judge
pd
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PAWAN
DHARKAR
Signing time: 10/16/2026
9:39:12 AM