#Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court acquitted several officials, ruling that mere administrative irregularities in a teacher recruitment process cannot satisfy the ‘dishonest or fraudulent intention’ element of Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The decision narrows the Act’s reach, protecting officials from prosecution where only procedural lapses occur.

Madhya Pradesh High Court directs the School Education Department to honor earned leave encashment up to 300 days for state employees, aligning with Finance Department circulars and Rule 25 of the Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977. The ruling impacts all state government departments still enforcing the 240-day cap.

Madhya Pradesh High Court dismisses State's plea to cancel bail, holding that mere registration of new cases based on disclosure memo does not satisfy the test for bail revocation under BNSS.

MP High Court rules that unilateral withdrawal of Second Kramonnati (financial upgradation) benefits after retirement, without prior notice or hearing, violates principles of natural justice and constitutional rights. The court directed restoration of the petitioner’s pay scale and refund of recovered retiral dues with interest, reinforcing protections against arbitrary administrative actions affecting pensioners.

MP High Court suspends the remaining jail sentence of a POCSO convict, emphasizing the appellant's prolonged custody period, gaps in witness testimony, and absence of criminal antecedents. The ruling underscores that bail under POCSO may be granted where evidentiary reliability is questionable, even in serious offences.

MP High Court reinforces that prolonged suspension without concluding departmental enquiry violates natural justice, relying on the Supreme Court's Ajay Kumar Chaudhary judgment. The court directed expeditious disposal of the suspension review within four weeks, setting a critical timeline for service law compliance affecting government employees.

Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that contractual employees cannot be transferred if their appointment order explicitly prohibits it. The court quashed the transfer order of a Gram Rojgar Sahayak, reinforcing that administrative actions must align with the terms of employment contracts, impacting service law and contractual employment rights.

Madhya Pradesh High Court rules that daily wagers' retirement age is 60 years for Class-III posts and 62 years for Class-IV posts, overriding interim relief periods. The judgment clarifies service conditions under the 2013 Rules, impacting thousands of daily wage employees in the state.

Madhya Pradesh High Court rules that a litigant's suit cannot be dismissed due to their lawyer's absence, emphasizing that procedural defaults by counsel should not prejudice the client. The Court restored the suit under Order IX Rule 9 CPC, reinforcing that medical emergencies and genuine inability to attend hearings are valid grounds for restoration, even if not communicated to the lawyer.

Madhya Pradesh High Court reinforces that Section 14 SARFAESI Act applications are administrative in nature, requiring no borrower notice. District authorities must dispose of such applications within 10 days, failing which secured creditors face undue delays in debt recovery.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that mere breach of internal transfer guidelines - even when causing personal hardship - does not justify judicial intervention in administrative postings. This clarifies that only malafide intent, arbitrariness, or statutory violation can override the state’s discretion in personnel transfers, reinforcing that no public servant has a legal right to a fixed posting. A critical precedent for government employees and administrative authorities navigating transfer disputes.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that the state amendment to the Court Fees Act imposes a hard cap of Rs. 1,50,000 on court fees for all civil suits, regardless of claim value - including high-value specific performance cases. This removes the burden of ad-valorem fees on litigants in high-stakes contract disputes and standardizes litigation costs across the state.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that even when a government employee is acquitted in a criminal case, the departmental enquiry can proceed independently on the same facts, as the standards of proof differ - criminal acquittal under beyond reasonable doubt does not equate to exoneration under preponderance of probabilities. This reaffirms that public service discipline remains a separate sphere, affecting all state employees facing parallel proceedings.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has stayed a transfer order under MNREGA, holding that employees cannot be moved on administrative grounds unless the policy explicitly permits it - and here, the policy requires employee-initiated requests. This reinforces that even temporary workers are protected from arbitrary administrative action, setting a clear limit on district authorities' discretion under welfare schemes.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that a defendant cannot assert a counter-claim against a person not already a party to the suit, reinforcing that the plaintiff's dominus litis status cannot be undermined by extending claims to strangers. This clarifies the limits of impleadment under Order I Rule 10 and protects litigants from being dragged into unrelated disputes through backdoor counter-claims.