Pawan Vaishnav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 12096 MP

                          1
        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                     AT GWALIOR
                           BEFORE
        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA
                ON THE 12th OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

              WRIT PETITION No. 10550 of 2022

     BETWEEN:-
1.   PAWAN   VAISHNAV S/O SHRI KAILASH
     NARAYAN VAISHNAV, AGED ABOUT- 30 YEARS,
     OCCUPATION- CONSTABLE (G.D.), POSTED AT
     PRESENT 26TH BATTALION, S.A.F., GUNA
     DISTRICT-GUNA (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.   NARESH JATAV S/O SHRI NABLU JATAV, AGED
     ABOUT- 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION- CONSTABLE
     (G.D.), POSTED AT PRESENT 26TH BATTALION,
     S.A.F.,   GUNA DISTRICT-GUNA (MADHYA
     PRADESH)

3.   AKASH SAHU S/O PRAKASH CHAND SAHU,
     AGED   ABOUT-     32  YEARS, OCCUPATION-
     CONSTABLE (G.D.), POSTED AT PRESENT 26TH
     BATTALION, S.A.F., GUNA DISTRICT-GUNA
     (MADHYA PRADESH)

4.   NARENDRA MALVIYA S/O SHRI K.L. MALVIYA,
     AGED   ABOUT-     25  YEARS, OCCUPATION-
     CONSTABLE (G.D.), POSTED AT PRESENT 26TH
     BATTALION, S.A.F., GUNA DISTRICT-GUNA
     (MADHYA PRADESH)

5.   LEKHRAJ SINGH GURJAR S/O SHRI LOTAN
     SINGH, AGED ABOUT- 29 YEARS, OCCUPATION-
     CONSTABLE (G.D.), POSTED AT PRESENT 18TH
     BATTALION,   S.A.F., SHIVPURI   DISTRICT
     SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)

6.   PARAMSUKH MANJHI S/O SHRI RAMNAND
     MANJHI,    AGED     ABOUT-  29    YEARS,
     OCCUPATION- CONSTABLE (G.D.), POSTED AT
     PRESENT 18TH BATTALION, S.A.F., SHIVPURI
     DISTRICT SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                 .....PETITIONERS
     (BY SHRI SUSHIL GOSWAMI- ADVOCATE)

     AND
                                      2
1.       STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
         PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT,
         VALLABH    BHAWAN    BHOPAL   (MADHYA
         PRADESH)

2.       DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD
         QUARTER, JAHANGIRABAD, BHOPAL (MADHYA
         PRADESH)

3.       ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
         ( S E L E C T I O N ) POLICE HEAD QUARTER,
         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 SANJAY SHARMA- GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
         (SHRI PRAVEEN NEWASKAR- ADVOCATE FOR THE
         RESPONDENT NO.4)

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

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking following reliefs :

I. to call for the relevant record.

II. to quash the merit list its relates with the petitioners and further be pleased to direct the respondents to issue a fresh merit list by considering the preference given by the petitioners within their respective category and allot the post and seat as per preference given in application.

III. To direct the respondents to give appointment to the petitioners in District Force/S.B. 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) IV. Any other relief together cost of the petition which this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of this case may also be awarded in favour of the

petitioner.

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 o n 24th February, 2022 in Civil Appeal No. 7663/2021. To buttress his contention, the counsel for the petitioners has 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 as 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.

In case 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 2022.09.12 19:37:00 -07'00'