Pramila Vibhute vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 13122 MP

                                                                  1
                           IN       THE       HIGH        COURT OF MADHYA                          PRADESH
                                                            AT INDORE
                                                        BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
                                                    ON THE 11 th OF AUGUST, 2023
                                                 WRIT PETITION No. 13158 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           PRAMILA VIBHUTE W/O SHRI RAMAKANT VIBHUTE,
                           AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NIL M.L.
                           NAGAR, UJJAIN DISTRICT UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                .....PETITIONER
                           (NONE FOR PETITIONER )

                           AND
                           1.      THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH DEPARTMENT
                                   OF SCHOOL EDUCATION THROUGH PRINCIPAL
                                   SECRETARY VALLABH BHAWAN, DISTRICT
                                   BHOPAL. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.      COMMISSIONER/DIRECTOR LOK SHIKSHAN
                                   SANCHANALAYA GAUTAM NAGAR HOUSING
                                   BOARD COLONY BHOPAL M.P. (MADHYA
                                   PRADESH)

                           3.      SECRETARY EMPLOYEES SELECTION BOARD
                                   CHAYAN BHAWAN MAIN ROAD NO. 1 CHAINAR
                                   PARK EAST BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                             .....RESPONDENTS
                            (SHRI KOUSTUBH PATHAK - G.A. FOR RESPONDENTS)

                           This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                           following:
                                                                   ORDER

Counsel for the respondents submits that identical petition i.e. W.P.No.18268/2023 (Seema Sharma Vs. State of M.P. and others) has been decided by order dated 1.08.2023.

2. The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs in the petition : Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 11-08-2023 18:41:41

1) that, the High Court be pleased to allow the petition by modifying the impugned condition No.6 of the advertisement dated 18.5.2023 issued by the respondent No.3 by adding the age relaxation of three years in view of instructions dated 18.09.2022.

2) to accept the candidature of the petitioners for Mains Examination of the Teacher Eligibility Test, 2023.

3) to direct the respondents to declare the petition qualified in the High School Teacher Eligibility Test 2018 in the EW category.

3. After hearing learned counsel for respondents and on perusal of the order passed in the case of Seema Sharma(supra), this Court is of the view that issue raised in the present petition claiming age relaxation as per circular dated 18.09.2022 for selection test, 2023 has been considered by the co-ordinate bench. The relevant part of the said judgment is reproduced below:-

"10. Notesheet appended with the application vide Annexure P/5 clarified the position that School Education Department in pursuance to the circular dated 18.09.2022 isued First Advertisement on 29.09.2022 for filling up the posts of UDT and therefore, for this First Advertisement age relaxation was given. In the said notesheet it has been specifically mentioned that for selection examination of UDT as per notification dated 29.04.2023, age relaxation is not given.

11. Gazette notification dated 1.12.2022 also incorporates the amendment in Rule 8 of the Rules, 2018 in which two phased examination has been conceptualised wherein one is Eligibility Test and another is Selection Test, therefore, pattern of Examination has changed subsequent to the circular dated 18.09.2022 because notification is dated 1.12.2022. Even otherwise, it is confined to First Advertisement and not beyond that.

12. Therefore, looking to the clarificatory notesheet attached with the petition as Annexure A/5, it appears that no other conclusion can be drawn for giving equitable relief to the petitioner except to confine the benefit to the candidates who were aspirants in that examination which is being held by way of First Advertisement after passing of Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 11-08-2023 18:41:41

circular dated 18.09.2022 and not for any subsequent examination.

13. In the considered opinion of this Court that the petitioner is not entitled for final relief then she cannot be permitted to appear in the said examination on the strength of age relaxation as per circular dated 18.09.2022."

In view of aforesaid, since the issue raised in the petition is squarely covered by the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench in the case of Seema Sharma (supra), the present petition is also dismissed.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE

MK

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 11-08-2023 18:41:41