Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jai Kumar Koshti vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 October, 2022
Author: Vishal Mishra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 17th OF OCTOBER, 2022
WRIT PETITION No. 22872 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
1. JAI KUMAR KOSHTI, S/O SHRI GOVIND
PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
SERVICE 10TH BATTALION ROLL NO. 21145538
R/O H.NO. 268/2 KOSHTI MOHALLA VILLAGE
TEJGARH DISTT. DAMOH (MADHYA PRADESH)
2. LOKENDR SINGH KAURAV S/O SHRI CHARAN
SINGH KAURAV, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: SERVICE 29TH BATTALION R/O
20, WARD 1 ALAMPUR, GANGEPURA DISTRICT
BHIND MP AT PRESENT POSTING AND R/O A
COMPANY SHAHDOL DISTRICT SHAHDOL
(MADHYA PRADESH) ROLL NO. 20809715
3. LALIT BISEN, S/O SHRI DEVNATH BISEN, AGED
ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE 35TH
BATTALION MANDALA MP ROLL NO. 21091655
R/O WARD 5 JAGPUR GARRA DISTRICT
BALAGHAT (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. SURAJ RAJPOOT S/O SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
SERVICE 5TH BATTALION MP R/O WARD 15
ANTRI DISTRICT GWALIOR AT PRESENT
RESIDENT OF RANJHI JABALPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH) ROLL NO. 20775290
5. PRAKASH JAMOD, S/O SHRI CHAGAN SINGH
JAMOD, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
SERVICE 23TH / 25TH BATTALION BHOPAL MP
ROLL NO. 20906245 R/O 19 VILLAGE KAKRIYA,
GAJKOTA DISTRICT DHAR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
6. ANAKLAL SHEELU S/O SHRI SOMA SHEELU,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
SERVICE 23TH BATTALION BHOPAL ROLL NO.
20690736 R/O WARD NO. 07 NEAR GOVT.
SCHOOL PATELI KHEDA, MANKUGHATI,
BHATODIA KHURD DISTRICT CHHINDWARA
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TAJAMMUL
HUSSAIN KHAN
Signing time: 10/18/2022
5:58:39 PM
2
(MADHYA PRADESH)
7. MADAN SINGH GURJAR S/O SHRI KESHAV
SINGH GURJAR, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: SERVICE 32TH BATTALION R/O
BIRUNGA ITAWALI DISTRICT MORENA AT
PRESENT RESIDENT OF POLICE LINE
JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH) ROLL NO.
20714743
8. ASHOK KUMAR CHAURASIYA, S/O SHRI
GHANSHYAM DAS, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: SERVICE 10TH BATTALION
SAGAR ROLL NO. 21300647 R/O WARD NO. 03
CHAURASIYA MOHALLA, CHANDERA KHAS
DISTRICT TIKAMGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI R.S. THAKUR - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT
VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE HEAD
QUARTER JAHANGIRABAD BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
(SELECTION) P.H.Q. JAHANGIRABAD BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. PROFESSIONAL EXAMINATION BOARD
THROUGH ITS SECRETARY CHAYAN BHAWAN
MAIN ROAD NO. 1 CHINAR PARK (EAST)
BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI SWAPNIL GANGULY - DEPUTY ADVOCATE GENERAL)
This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that representations of the
subject matter of this petition is pending before the respondents No.1, 2 and 3.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TAJAMMUL
HUSSAIN KHAN
Signing time: 10/18/2022
5:58:39 PM
He has also drawn attention of this Court to Annexure-P/5 at page No.55 which
is the order passed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.7663/2021
(Praveen Kumar Kurmi vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others)
where, the Supreme Court, in a case of similarly situated candidates had
preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court which held that a person from
the reserved category, though falling within the eligibility of the general seat on
account of his high merit, should not be placed to a disadvantageous position
as regard the service and post viz-a-viz a candidate who may be placed below
him.
Under the circumstances, the petition is disposed of with a request to the
respondents No. 2 and 3 to consider the representations of the petitioners
within a period of 60 days in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Civil
Appeal No.7663/2021 and also in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in
Ritesh R. Sah vs. Dr. Y.L. Yamul and Others (1996) 3 SCC 253. If the
case of the petitioners is similar to the case of the appellants in Civil Appeal
No.7663/2021, then similar benefits be extended to the petitioners herein.
The authorities are at liberty to consider the fact that the vacancies were
of the year 2014 and the judgment passed by the Supreme Court is with respect
to vacancies of the year 2017-2018.
With the aforesaid, the petition is finally disposed of.
The Court makes it clear that it has not passed any observations on the
merits of the case and the said representation be decided strictly in accordance
with law uninfluenced by the observations of this Court.
Certified copy, as per rules.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TAJAMMUL
HUSSAIN KHAN
Signing time: 10/18/2022
5:58:39 PM
(VISHAL MISHRA)
JUDGE
taj
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: TAJAMMUL
HUSSAIN KHAN
Signing time: 10/18/2022
5:58:39 PM
