Laxmichand v. State Of M.P And Others

Factual and Procedural Background

The petitioner applied on 30 March 1988 for grant of Samman Nidhi under the Madhya Pradesh Swatantrata Sangram Sainik Samman Nidhi Niyam, 1972. The State Government passed an order on 22 July 1994 granting the petitioner Rs. 750 per month as Samman Nidhi, the order being made effective from the date of issue of that order. The petitioner challenged the effective date, contending that the award should be made effective from the date of submission of the application (30 March 1988).

The respondents opposed the writ petition by filing a counter-affidavit/return denying entitlement to the grant with effect from the date of filing the application. The respondents relied on an amendment to the Rules of 1972 which came into force on 8 March 1999 (published in the Gazette Extraordinary) and was made retrospective by a deeming provision to be effective from the date of commencement of the Rules of 1972. The amendment (as quoted in the opinion) reads:

‘‘नियम-3, उपनियम (6) स्वतंत्रता संग्राम सैनिक, राज्य सम्मान निधि का लाभ, स्वीकृति आदेश के दिनांक से प्राप्त करने के पात्र होंगे’’ 2. यह संशोधन उक्त नियमों के प्रवृत्त होने के दिनांक से प्रभावशील होगा.

The writ petition was heard and disposed of by the court, which considered the amendment and an earlier Division Bench decision in similar circumstances.

Legal Issues Presented

1. Whether the Samman Nidhi awarded by the State Government should be effective from the date of submission of the application (30 March 1988) or from the date of issuance of the acceptance/order (22 July 1994).
2. Whether the retrospective amendment to the Rules of 1972 (declaring beneficiaries entitled to receive the benefit from the date of the acceptance order and deeming that rule effective from the commencement of the 1972 Rules) affects the petitioner's claim to an earlier effective date.

Arguments of the Parties

Petitioner's Arguments

• The petitioner contended that the order awarding Samman Nidhi should operate from the date of submission of the application (30 March 1988), entitling him to benefit from that earlier date.

Respondents' Arguments

• The respondents denied entitlement to benefit from the date of filing the application and relied on the amendment to the 1972 Rules (effective 8 March 1999) which, by a deeming provision, treated beneficiaries as entitled to receive the Samman Nidhi from the date of the acceptance order.
• The respondents emphasized that the amendment was made retrospective (deemed effective from the commencement of the Rules of 1972) and that the petition did not challenge the validity of that retrospective amendment.

Table of Precedents Cited

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court observed that the Legislature introduced a deeming provision in the amendment to the Rules of 1972, which declared that the rule shall be deemed to have been in force from the date of enforcement of the Madhya Pradesh Swatantrata Sangram Sainik Samman Nidhi Niyam, 1972. That statutory fiction (the retrospective deeming clause) negated the petitioner's claim to receive the Samman Nidhi from the date of filing the application.

Because the amendment was given retrospective effect, the court stated it could not be ignored. The court emphasized that the petitioner had not challenged the retrospective amendment in the writ petition; in the absence of any foundation laid to challenge the amendment, the court was unwilling to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to disturb the impugned order.

The court also relied on the earlier Division Bench decision in State of M.P. v. Anand Bihari, which had upheld grant of Samman Nidhi from the date of issuance of the order (and not from the date of application) in similar circumstances, taking into account the implications of the amendment. On that basis, the court found no justifiable ground for interference with the State Government's order.

Holding and Implications

The writ petition is dismissed.

Direct effect on the parties: The impugned order of the State Government granting Samman Nidhi at Rs. 750 per month, effective from the date of issuance of the order (22 July 1994), stands; the petitioner is not entitled to have the award made effective from the date of filing the application. There shall be no order as to costs.

The opinion does not discuss broader legal implications beyond the immediate dispute; it does not purport to set a new precedent beyond applying the retrospective amendment and the cited Division Bench decision.