1 2025:CGHC:42295-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 496 of 2025 Neelkamal Garg S/o R. S. D. Garg, Aged About 65 Years Occupation- Retired Government Employee Grade-3, R/o Ward - 52, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, ... Appellant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Agriculture, Agriculture Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Director Agriculture, Department Of Agriculture, Sanchanalaya Agriculture C.G. Indrawati Bhavan, Atal Nagar Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Deputy Director Agriculture, Old Composite Building, Near In Nehru Chowk, Bilaspur District Bilaspur C.G. 4 - State Of Madhya Pradesh, Through The Secretary, Department Of Agriculture, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal Madhya Pradesh. 5 - The Director, Director Of Agriculture, M.P. Satpuda Bhawan, Bhopal Madhya Pradesh 6 - The Deputy Director Agriculture , Collectorate And Infront Of Pili Kothi Sagar, District Sagar Madhya Pradesh ... Respondents For Appellant : Neelkamal Garg in person For Respondents No.1 to 3/State : Mr.Yashwant Singh Thakur, Additional Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Digitally signed by BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Date: 2025.08.22 18:18:56 +0530 2 Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 21.08.2025 1. Heard appellant Neelkamal Garg in person. Also heard Mr.Yashwant Singh Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for respondents No.1 to 3. 2. The appellant has filed this writ appeal against the order dated 8.5.2025 passed by learned Single Judge in WPS No.870 of 2017, whereby learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant herein. 3. Brief facts necessary for disposal of the case are that the appellant was appointed on the post of Rural Agriculture Extension Officer at Baikunthpur, District Surguja (erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh) on 14.02.1983. Thereafter, pursuant to the permission/sanction granted to him by the Deputy Director (Agriculture), Sagar on 10.08.1985, the appellant pursued Doctorate in Philosophy and obtained PhD degree in the said field on 03/04.11.1993. Thereafter, on 07.10.1995, he made application for grant of two advance increments, which he is entitled for obtaining Ph.D. degree, but the same has not been granted to him till date. Aggrieved at which, the appellant filed writ petition seeking appropriate direction to the respondents-authorities to grant two advance increments from the date on which he acquired Ph.D. decree. 4. By the impugned order, learned Single Judge has dismissed the 3 writ petition filed by the writ petitioner / appellant herein by holding as under:- “9. Coming to the facts of the present case in light of the above-quoted circulars, it appears that vide order dated 10.08.1985 (Annexure-P/01) the petitioner was granted prior permission by the Deputy Director (Agriculture) for pursuing Bachelor of Law (LLB), Post-Graduation in Hindi and also for Higher Education. As such, it cannot be said the prior permission has been granted to the petitioner by the competent authority for the reason that the same has been granted by the Deputy Director (Agriculture), whereas according to the aforementioned circulars issued by the Government it is the head of the office or department or the appropriate government, who has been vested with the power to grant prior permission to the government servant, who wanted to attend any classes or to appear at higher examination. Moreover, as per petitioner’s letter of appointment dated 05.08.1985, it is the Joint Director, who is the head of the department or office, where the petitioner was working and posted and not the Deputy Director. Even otherwise, in the case of the petitioner, according to circular dated 13th July, 1972, the Director (Agriculture) would be the competent authority being the head of the department to grant permission, but the petitioner has been granted permission by the Deputy Director and not by the Director or by the Joint Director. In addition to it, it also transpires from order dated 10.08.1985 (Annexure- P/01) that in one go the petitioner has been granted to pursue 03 courses i.e. (i) Bachelor of Law (LLB), (ii) 4 Post-Graduation in Hindi and (iii) Higher Education. As such, no permission has been granted to the petitioner specifically to pursue PhD degree, indeed, it has been granted to pursue Bachelor of Law (LLB), Post-Graduation in Hindi and also for Higher Education that too by an incompetent authority. Consequently, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner is not entitled for grant of 02 advance increments for obtaining PhD degree. 10. In that view of the matter, the present writ petition deserves to be and is hereby dismissed being bereft of any merit.”. Hence, this writ appeal. 5. The appellant in person submits that learned Single Judge erred in dismissing the writ petition by not considering the permission granted by the Deputy Director of Agriculture, District Sagar, on 10.08.1985, as a competent authority. He further submits that he had submitted an application form through the official of his posting office, Block Rahli, District Sagar, addressed to the Head of the Department, Director of Agriculture, M.P. Bhopal, on 06.08.1985 for “obtaining permission to do Ph.D” and an application form was also submitted to the District Officer, Deputy Director of Agriculture, Sagar on 7.8.1985 for permission to do Ph.D., on which permission was granted and a formal permission letter was issued on 10.08.1985, due to which, the appellant claims that as per the circular of the State Government dated 13th July, 1972, he has the basis to be eligible to receive the said two 5 advance increments. However, learned Single Judge failed to consider this aspect adequately. He also submits that learned Single Judge did not give due consideration to the facts, documents and arguments presented. The order lacks a justifiable interpretation and has resulted in a violation of the appellant's constitutional rights under Articles 14 and 16. The decision is flawed and unjust. He contended that if the Deputy Director of Agriculture, Sagar, was not the competent authority, the application of the appellant made on 6.8.1985 would have been forwarded to the Director of Agriculture, Bhopal (MP) to whom the appellant has addressed the application. However, due to the authority's mistake or ignorance, and the respondents' failure to raise objections over 32 years, the appellant cannot be held responsible. The denial of two advance increments to the appellant, as per Government Rules, is unjust and equivalent to punishing an innocent person. As such, the writ appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned order passed by learned Single Judge deserves to be quashed/set aside. 6. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for respondents No.1 to 3/State opposes the submissions made by the appellant in person and submits that learned Single Judge after considering all the aspects of the matter has dismissed the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner / appellant herein, which warrants no interference by this Court. 6 7. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the impugned order and other documents appended with writ appeal. 8. Advance increments have been mentioned in Chhattisgarh Suvidha Handbook at page 200 which states as under:- “1. डि्ቇी- डिप्लोमा के संद्ቝ में (1) इंजीनियस तथा ॉक्टरों को स्ातको्ቈर उपाडि" अቌኌजत करे पर उके वेतमा में दो अनि्ቇम वेतवृडि'यां देय। यह अनि्ቇम वेतवृडि'यां यनिद वे नियुनि+ के समय ऐसी उपाडि" रखते हैं, तो नियुनि+ निदांक से अथवा हीं रखते हैं तो बाद में सेवा के दौरा जब ्ቝी अቌኌजत करें, तब से देय होंगी। यनिद ऐसी स्ातको्ቈर उपाडि" पद पर नियुनि+ के लिलये न्यूतम योग्यता में शानिमल है, तो इसका ला्ቝ ्ቚा्቎ हीं होगा। यह आदेश पशु डि<निकत्सा निव्ቝाग के ॉक्टरों को ्ቝी लागू है। (2) उपरो+ के अलावा अन्य संवग> के सरकारी सेवक ्ቝी यनिद नियुनि+ के समय ॉक्टरेट डि्ቇी यथा पी-ए<ी., ी.एससी/डि.नि@ल, डि.लिलट् इत्यानिद "ारक हैं, तो उन्हें नियुनि+ डितथिथ से अन्यथा बाद में जब वे अቌኌजत करें तब से दो अनि्ቇम वेतवृडि'यां उन्हें उके वेतमा में ्ቚा्቎ होंगी। यह जरूरी हीं है निक निवषय जिजसमें उन्होंे उपाडि" हाजिसल की है, उके निव्ቝाग से संबंडि"त हो। बशतG ऐसी डि्ቇी उके पद के लिलए न्यूतम अहता में शानिमल हो। (3) उपरो+ ्ቚकार की उपाडि" <ाहे शास के ख< पर ्ቚा्቎ की गई हो अथवा स्वयं के व्यय पर, इसमें कोई ्ቝेद्ቝाव हीं करते हुए दोों ही मामलों में अनि्ቇम वेतवृडि'यां देय हैं। (4) जो सेवक अपे वेतमा के अडि"कतम पर हैं, उन्हें ्ቝी अंडितम वेतवृडि' के बराबर की राथिश अनि्ቇम वेतवृडि' के रूप में मंजूर की जा सके गी। यह उका व्यनि+गत वेत माा जायेगा। (5) यह तदथ रूप से नियु+ व्यनि+यों को ये देय हीं हैं। (6) शास के यह ्ቝी आदेश हैं निक थि्ቝ्ቐ- थि्ቝ्ቐ निवषयों में डि्ቇी ्ቚा्቎ करे पर ये अनि्ቇम वेत वृडि'यां बार- बार देय हीं होंगी। अथात् सेवा में के वल 7 एक बार ही देय होंगी। (7) ये आदेश निदांक 1-1-72 से लागू निकये गये हैं तथा सामान्य ्ቚशास निव्ቝाग ्ቅमांक ी. 261/292/1/3, निदांक 8-5-73, ्ቅ. ी. 308/431/1/3, निदांक 19-8-75, ्ቅ ी. 312/440/1/3, निदांक 20- 8-75, ्ቅ ी. 116/966/1/3, निदांक 28-5-76, ्ቅ. ी. 133/183/1/3, निदांक 4-4-87 तथा ्ቅ. सी-2-2/92/3/1, निदांक 18- 11-92 ्ቛारा जारी निकये गये हैं। (8) इ अनि्ቇम वेतवृडि'यों से सामान्य वेतवृडि' की डितथिथ में कोई ” परिरवत हीं होगा। Clause (1) of the aforesaid provision states that for engineers and doctors, two advance increments in their pay scale are admissible upon acquiring a post-graduate degree. These increments will be payable from the date of appointment if they possess such a degree at the time of appointment, or from the date they acquire it during service. However, if such a postgraduate degree is included in the minimum qualifications for the post, the benefit will not be admissible. This order also applies to doctors in the veterinary department. 9. Admittedly, the appellant was appointed on the post of Rural Agriculture Extension Officer at Baikunthpur, District Surguja (erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh) on 14.02.1983. Thereafter, pursuant to the permission/sanction granted to him by the Deputy Director (Agriculture) on 10.08.1985, the appellant pursued Doctorate in Philosophy and obtained Ph.D. degree on 03/04.11.1993. Thereafter, on 07.10.1995, he made an application for grant of two advance increments, which he is entitled for 8 obtaining Ph.D. degree, but the same has not been granted to him till date and for which, he has filed writ petition, which was dismissed by learned Single Judge. 10. The appellant made a request for permission to pursue LLB, Post- Graduation in Hindi and Ph.D. in Hindi before the Director (Agriculture), Bhopal (MP) on 6.8.85. The application states as under:- “्ቚडित माीय सं<ालक कृ निष महोदय ्ቝोपाल (म.्ቚ.) ्ቛारा:- ्ቦीमा वरिर्቗ कृ निष निवकास अडि"कारी. रहली, जिजला सागर निवषय:- निवडि" स्ातक निहन्दी स्ातको्ቈर तथा पी ए< ी. निहन्दी में करे की अुमडित ्ቚदा करे हेतु ्ቚाथा प्ቔ। मान्यवर, निव्቞ निवेद है निक में अपी शैडिRक योग्यता में उ्ሴ थिशRण ्ቚा्቎ कर वृडि' करा <ाहता हूं। निवडि" में स्ातक तथा निहन्दी में एम.ए. और निहन्दी में ही पी ए< ी ्ቝी करा <ाहता हूं जिजसके लिलए मैं शासकीय सेवा में निबा कोई बा"ा, व्यव"ा आए, निव्ቝागीय अुमडित ्ቚा्቎ करे हेतु ्ቚाथा प्ቔ उडि<त माध्यम से ्ቚस्तुत कर रहा हूं। निवेद है निक यनिद मेरे ्ቛारा निवडि" स्ातक, निहन्दी स्ातको्ቈर तथा निहन्दी उ्ሴ थिशRण पी ए<. ी. निहन्दी में करे के दरम्या शासकीय काय> एवं आदेशों, निदGशों की अवहेला व लापरवाही बरते जाे पर मेरी अुमडित को आपके ्ቛारा र्ቌ निकया जा सके गा। एक साथ अुमडित ्ቚदा करें। अतः करव' ्ቚाथा है निक मुझे यथाशी्ቈ निवडि" में स्ातक निहन्दी में एम. ए और निहन्दी में ही पी ए<. ी करे की अुमडित ्ቚदा करे की कृ पा करें। परीRा परिरणामों क उपरांत मेरी सብኌवस बुक में दज कराे हेतु एस.ी.ए.ओ. तथा एस. ए ी ओ रहली को निदGथिशत करे की कृ पा करें तानिक पी ए<. ी. करे पर शास ्ቛारा दो निवशेष वेतवृडि' का ला्ቝ निमल सके । रहली ्ቚाथ^ निदांक 6.8.85 हस्ताRर-सही- ( ीलकमल गग) ्ቇा.कृ .निव.अ. निवखं. रहली जिजला सागर (म.्ቚ)” 9 11.On the basis of application filed by the appellant, the Deputy Director (Agriculture), Sagar has granted permission by order dated 10.08.1985 to pursue Bachelor of Law (LLB), Post- Graduation in Hindi and Higher Education. The order dated 10.08.1985 states as under:- “ कायालय उपसं<ालक कृ निष - सागर ्ቅमाँक/स्था0/85-86/Q सागर निदाँक 1:8.85 ्ቚडित, ्ቦी ीलकमल गग, ्ቇामीण कृ निष निवस्तार अडि"कारी, रेगुवां- निव. ख. रहली- सागर. निवषयः निवडि" स्ातक तथा निहन्दी उ्ሴ थिशRण बावत् । सन्द्ቝः आवेद निदाँक 6 अगस्त 85. ... निवषयान्तगत एवं संदቝኌ्ቝत आवेद के तारतम्य में लेख कर आपको निवडि" स्ातक थिशRण एवं निहन्दी स्ातको्ቈर तथा उ्ሴ थिशRण हेतु अुमडित ्ቚदा की जाती है । ध्या रहे निक यनिद शासकीय काय> की अवहेला की गई तो उ+ अुमडित jn~n कर दी जावेगी । हस्ताRर-सही- उपसं<ालक कृ निष, सागर. सागर निदाँक……… .” 12. Upon examination of the order dated 10.08.1985 issued by the Deputy Director of Agriculture, Sagar, it is evident that although the term "Ph.D." is not explicitly mentioned, the implied meaning of the order is that permission has been granted to pursue higher education, including Ph.D., in addition to LL.B. and Post- 10 Graduation in Hindi. Therefore, it can be reasonably inferred that the Deputy Director's order intended to grant permission for Ph.D. studies as part of the Higher Education. 13.The Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the matter of Smt.Snehlata Purohit v. State of M.P. & Ors. (Writ Appeal No.315 of 2009), decided on 19.11.2014 has observed as under:- “It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that question whether appellant is entitled to claim the benefit of two advance increments on account of possessing the Ph.D. Degree which has been considered in W.P. No. 6743/03 (Dr. Subhash Chandra Mehta Vs. State of M.P. & ors.) decided on 06/04/04. Para-4 of the order reads as under:- “Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record of the case, I am inclined to allow the writ. In my considered view, conjoint reading of aforementioned three circular makes the intention of the State clear namely, ‘pay two advanced increments to those who have obtained Ph.D. degree while in the employment. It seems that object underlined in issuing these circulars is to give benefit to those teachers/lecturers/professor, who are having additional qualification of Ph.D. It is in the nature of incentive. It was later made compulsory. In any event, the moment, teacher/lecturer/professor as the case may be is able to obtain while in service a degree of Ph.D., he becomes entitled to get the 11 benefit of two advance increments in his pay scale. Such benefit cannot be denied to him even after his showing Ph.D. to the State”. ‘The aforesaid order has been challenged by the State by filing writ appeal bearing No.322/08 decided on 05/03/04. It is also submitted that respondent No.1 issued a circular dated 19/24.5.1989 (Annexue P/6) providing for grant of advance increments of a regular Teacher in the Department of Higher Education on account of his acquiring Ph.D. Degree, who was appointed prior to 1.4.1976 and Ph.D. was not necessary qualification for the post which he is holding. Similar Circular was also issued on 30/06/2000 (Annexure P/7) providing for grant of advance increments on account of obtaining Ph.D. Degree. He also submitted that Ph.D. has never been an essential qualification at the time when the appellant was appointed whether on the post of Lecturer in the year 1959 or whether on the post of Assistant Professor in the year 1974 or on the post of Time bound promoted professor in the year 1985. To support the aforesaid contention, he drew our attention to M.P. Education Services (Collegiate Branch) Recruitment Rules. 1967 and submitted that appellant acquired Ph.D. Degree as an additional qualification. He lastly submitted that in an identical circumstances, the time bound professor Dr. Subhash Chandra Mehta who also obtained Ph.D. Degree in the year 1990 has been granted benefit of advance increments on account of his obtaining Ph.D. degree pursuant to the order dated 06/04/04 passed in W.P. No. 6743/03. 12 With the aforesaid, he submitted that impugned order be set aside and his appeal be allowed. On the other hand learned Dy. Govt. Advocate supports the judgment of leaned Single Judge and prayed for dismissal of the writ appeal. On due consideration of the Schedule-4 of Recruitment Rules, Ph.D.Degree was not the essential qualification for appointment/recruitment on the post of Assistant Professor/Professor. The issue involved is squarely covered by the decision of Subhash Chandra Mehta (supra). On due consideration of the aforesaid, we set aside the impugned order and allowed the writ appeal with a direction to the respondents to grant two advance increments to the appellant. Let the benefit be worked out and it be then paid to the appellant, if not so far paid by the respondents within six months. Writ appeal is accordingly disposed of.” (Emphasis Supplied)” 14.The judgment passed by the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Smt.Snehlata Purohit (supra) has been relied upon and followed by learned Single Judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Indore in the matter of Dr.(Mrs) Rajrani Khurana v. Higher Education Department and others (Writ Petition No.12698 of 2020), decided on 5th December, 2024 and held as under:- “10. It is apparent from the aforesaid decision that this Court has already had the occasion to deal with the identical issue of grant of increments to a 13 person holding Ph.D. Degree, and the petition has been allowed. In view of the same, this Court is also of the considered opinion that the aforesaid decision would be applicable mutatis mutandis in the facts and circumstances of the present case also, and, resultantly, the impugned order dated 10.10.2019 is hereby quashed, and the respondents are directed to accord the benefits of three increments to the petitioner with effect from the date on which the same were granted to her, and to refix her pay taking into account the three increments, and to release the arrears thereof along with interest @ 6% per annum, and also to refund the amount of recovery already recovered from the petitioner along with interest @ 6% per annum.” 15.As such, the finding recorded by learned Single Judge that no permission has been granted to the petitioner specifically to pursue PhD degree, indeed, it has been granted to pursue Bachelor of Law (LLB), Post-Graduation in Hindi and also for Higher Education that too by an incompetent authority deserves to be set aside. 16.Considering the submissions advanced by the parties, perusing the application of the appellant dated 6.8.85, further considering the order issued by the Deputy Director (Agriculture), Sagar, also considering the finding recorded by learned Single Judge and the law laid down by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Smt.Snehlata Purohit (supra) and in Dr.(Mrs) Rajrani Khurana (supra), we are of the considered opinion that learned Single 14 Judge has committed grave legal error in dismissing the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner / appellant herein. 17.Accordingly, the writ appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 08.05.2025 (Annexure A-1) passed by learned Single Judge in WPS No.870/2017 is set aside and consequent thereto, the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner stands allowed. The respondents are directed to accord the benefits of two advance increments to the appellant with effect from the date on which he acquired Ph.D. degree pursuant to the order dated 10.08.85 issued by the Deputy Director (Agriculture), Sagar alongwith simple interest @ 6% per annum. No cost(s). 18. Let the aforesaid exercise be completed within a period of two months from today. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Bablu