Madhya Pradesh High Court
Narendra Rathore vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 January, 2023
Author: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
ON THE 25 th OF JANUARY, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 24550 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
1. NARENDRA RATHORE S/O JANKILAL, AGED
ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCCUPATION: CONSTABLE GD
23RD BN (DRIVER) DISTT. BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. SATISH SEN S/O RAMNIVAS, AGED ABOUT 30
YEARS, OCCUPATION: CONSTABLE GD 25TH BN
SAF BHOPAL ROLL NO. 21175576 (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. HEMRAJ AHIRWAR S/O TULSIRAM AHIRWAR,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
CONSTABLE GD 7TH BN SAF BHOPAL ROLL NO.
21251067 (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. ROHIT RAI S/O HARI SINGH RAI, AGED ABOUT 28
YEARS, OCCUPATION: CONSTABLE GD 10TH BN
SAF BHOPAL ROLL NO. 23997883 (MADHYA
PRADESH)
5. SUMANT VERMA S/O DAYASHANKAR VERMA
OCCUPATION: CONSTABLE GD SP BETUL ROLL
NO. 23919076 BETUL ROLL NO. 23919076 (MADHYA
PRADESH)
6. SANJAY DANGI S/O LAXMI CHAND DANGI, AGED
ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCCUPATION: CONSTABLE GD
7TH BN SAF BHOPAL ROLL NO. 20891942
(MADHYA PRADESH)
7. ABHILESH YADAV S/O SURESH CHANDRA YADAV,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
CONSTABLE GD 7TH BN SAF BHOPAL (DRIVER)
M.T. ROLL NO. 23641616 (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
8. KARAN SINGH DANGI S/O INDRAJ SINGH, AGED
SAN
Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI
ABOUT 27 YEARS, OCCUPATION: CONSTABLE GD
Date: 2023.01.25 19:42:58 IST
10TH BN SAF SAGAR ROLL NO. 20785338 (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2
9. ANIL DAMAR S/O DULESINGH, AGED ABOUT 29
YEARS, OCCUPATION: CONSTABLE GD 8TH BN
SAF CHHINDWARA ROLL NO. 21032440 (MADHYA
PRADESH)
10. SANDEEP SINGH KUSHWAHA S/O RAM NIHOR
KUSHWAHA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: CONSTABLE GD S.P. DISTRICT
SEHORE ROLL NO. 24078397 (MADHYA PRADESH)
11. NITIN CHIDAR S/O MURLIDHAR CHIDAR, AGED
ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCCUPATION: CONSTABLE GD
S.P. DISTRICT BALAGHAT ROLL NO. 23559468
(MADHYA PRADESH)
12. VINOD DHAKAD S/O BANBARI LAL DHAKAD,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
CONSTABLE GD 36TH BN SAF BALAGHAT ROLL
NO. 2435883 (MADHYA PRADESH)
13. AJAY KUMAR SAHU S/O MAHESH PRASAD, AGED
ABOUT 28 YEARS, OCCUPATION: CONSTABLE GD
10TH BN SAF SAGAR ROLL NO. 21208819 (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI PAWAN KUMAR SINGH SENGAR - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME
DEPARTMENT VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE POLICE
H E A D Q U A R T E R S JAHANGIRABAD BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
3. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF
POLICE (SELECTION) P. H . Q . JAHANGIRABAD
BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI SHIVAM HAZARE - PANEL LAWYER)
Signature Not Verified
SAN
This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI
Date: 2023.01.25 19:42:58 IST
following:
3
ORDER
Petitioners' case is that they were candidates for selection to the post of
Constable/Head Constable (Computer) and A.S.I. (Computer) for which
recruitment was initiated by the respondents.
2. Petitioners' grievance is that overlooking their merits, they were given
appointment at SAF and under similar facts and circumstances, Hon'ble
Supreme Court vide order dated 24.02.2022 passed in Civil Appeal
No.7663/2021 (Praveen Kumar Kurmi Vs. State of M.P. and others),
allowed the petition and directed that appellant would be entitled to the first
preference of District Police Force with all benefits of pay and seniority of that
force from the date he joined the Special Armed Force.
3. It is submitted that this order was delivered by the Supreme Court when
grievance was raised by the petitioners that reservation policy is not being
worked out in accordance with the judgment of Supreme Court in Indra
Sawhney and another Vs. Union of India and another 1992 Suppl. 3 SCC
2017. It is held that once appellant got selected on merit without being required
to avail of the benefit of the reservation, then he should have been allotted
concerned post as per his merit de hors the reservation.
4. In view of said decision of the Supreme Court, this petition can be
disposed of with a direction that if petitioners make a fresh representation within
fifteen days from today, raising their grievance raised herein, then the
respondents No. 2 and 3 shall consider and decide the same, through a
speaking order, within further period of sixty days from the date of certified
copy of this order being passed today.
Signature Not Verified
5. This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
SAN
Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI
Date: 2023.01.25 19:42:58 IST
6. In above terms, petition is disposed of.
(VIVEK AGARWAL)
JUDGE
A.Praj.
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI
Date: 2023.01.25 19:42:58 IST
