Mukesh Vaskle vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 14413 MP

                                   1
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          AT GWALIOR
                                BEFORE
             HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA
                       ON THE 7th OF NOVEMBER, 2022

                   WRIT PETITION No. 25179 of 2022

        BETWEEN:-
1.      MUKESH-VASKLE S/O SHRI ANAR SINGH, AGED
        ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCCUPATION: CONSTABLE,
        POSTED PRESENT 26TH B.N.S.A.F GUNA. M.P
        ROLL NO. 24127053.

2.      NITEEN MUKATI S/O SHRI DINESH MUKATI,
        AGED    ABOUT    29     YEARS, OCCUPATION
        CONSTABLE GD POSTED PRESENT 26TH BNSAF
        GUNA. M.P ROLL NO. 23568814.




                                                                .....PETITIONER
        (BY SHRI J.S.RATHORE- ADVOCATE)

        AND
1.      THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
        THE    PRINCIPAL  SECRETARY,    HOME
        DEPARTMENT,    MANTRALAYA    VALLABH
        BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.      THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE
        H EAD Q UARTER S JAHAGIRABAD,  BHOPAL
        (MADHYA PRADESH)

3.      THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF
        POLICE (SELECTION) POLICE HEADQUARTERS
        JAHAGIRABAD BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                             .....RESPONDENTS
        (BY SHRI N.S.TOMAR- GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

      Th is petition coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
following:
                                    ORDER

It is fairly conceded by the counsel for the petitioners that the petitioner

No.3 does not belong to reserved category, therefore, the counsel for the petitioners seeks permission of this Court to delete the name of the petitioner No.3.

The verbal prayer made by the counsel for the petitioners is hereby accepted. Accordingly, with the permission of the Court, the counsel for the petitioners has deleted the name of the petitioner No.3 from the cause title.

The Registry is directed to make necessary corrections on the website. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking following reliefs :

( i) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to allot the post under the District Police Establishment considering the preference given by the petitioners for the appointment.

( ii) To direct the respondents to give appointment to the petitioners in District Police with all consequential benefits like seniority and pay protection similarly to order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Praveen Kumar Kurmi (supra).

(iii) To direct the respondents to decide the representation in favor of the petitioners.

(iv) Any other reliefs which this Hon'ble Court deem fit in the circumstances of the case, may also be granted to the petitioners.

I t is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the Co-ordinate Benches of this Court had directed the respondents to decide the representation in the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Praveen Kumar Kurmi vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others decided on 24th February, 2022 in Civil Appeal No. 7663/2021 . To buttress his contention, the counsel for the petitioners have also relied upon the order dated 20th June, 2022 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of

Sandeep Kumar Sahu and Others vs. State of M.P. and Others in WP No. 10926 of 2022 (Principal Seat).

Per contra, it is submitted by the counsel for the respondents that at present they don't have any instructions.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

It is submitted by counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners may be granted liberty to file a representation for redressal of their grievances and the respondents may be directed to decide their representation in accordance with law.

In view of the innocuous prayer made by the petitioners, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to make a fresh representation pointing out their grievances and entitlement.

I n case if such a representation is made, then the respondents shall decide the same by passing a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the representation as well as the certified copy of this order.

I t is needless to mention that since this Court has not considered the merits of the case, therefore, the representation shall be decided strictly in accordance with law without getting prejudiced or influenced by this order.

(G.S. AHLUWALIA) JUDGE Pj'S/-

PRINCEE BARAIYA 2022.11.09 12:20:14 -08'00'