Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that individuals —whether government employees or not— who undergo sterilization under the state's family planning scheme offering the benefits of advance increments to employees opting for sterilization, cannot be deprived of the said benefits. The court clarified that these benefits extend even to those who underwent sterilization before entering government service.

Justice Subodh Abhyankar, presiding over the High Court’s Indore bench, delivered the verdict, stating that “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.”

The case involved a Staff Nurse, the petitioner, who had been granted an advance increment in 2013 based on a government circular dated July 25, 2001. The circular aimed to promote family planning and encouraged government servants to opt for sterilization procedures. However, in 2022, the petitioner received a recovery notice demanding Rs. 2,51,038, alleging she was ineligible for the increment as her sterilization occurred prior to February 24, 2010. This recovery was allegedly ordered without affording the petitioner a hearing.

The petitioner argued that the circular provided benefits to promote family planning and did not specify disqualification for sterilization conducted before government service. Furthermore, it was submitted that even if there was a misinterpretation of the circular, recovery could not be ordered after such a long period, especially when no facts were suppressed by the petitioner.

Contrarily, the State, on the other hand, contended that the circular mandated that the sterilization be conducted while the person was a government servant to qualify for the benefit.

Interpreting the circular, the court held that it was issued to further the state’s family planning goals. “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,” the court stated, holding that individuals contributing to this cause before joining government service should not be excluded from the scheme’s benefits upon appointment.

Additionally, referring to the Supreme Court's ruling in Thomas Daniel v. State of Kerala (2022), the court noted that recovery of excess payments made due to erroneous interpretation of rules is impermissible.

Conclusively, the court quashed the recovery orders against the petitioner finding that such orders “cannot be sustained in the eyes of the law” and held that benefits provided under the circular were valid.

 

Cause Title: Gori Saxena vs. State of Madhya Pradesh Directorate Ayush and Others [W.P. No. 28689 of 2022]

Appearance: Advocate Sumeet Samvatsar - for the petitioner; and Government Advocate Bhuwan Deshmukh on behalf of Advocate General for Respondents.