Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Madhya Pradesh Public Service ... vs Manoj Choudhary on 12 February, 2024
Author: Sheel Nagu
Bench: Sheel Nagu
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
WA No. 2017 of 2023
(THE MADHYA PRADESH PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND OTHERS Vs MANOJ CHOUDHARY AND
OTHERS)
Dated : 12-02-2024
Shri Prashant Singh - Advocate General with Shri Anvesh Shrivastava,
Shri Dhruv Narayan Singh and Shri Parag Tiwari - Advocate for appellants.
Shri Naman Nagrath - Senior Advocate with Shri Manan Agrawal,
Shri Akash Lalwani, Shri N.S. Ruprah, Shri Rameshwar Singh Thakur, Shri
Vinayak Prasad Shah, Shri Anshul Tiwari - Advocates for interveners.
Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal - Advocate for private respondents.
Learned counsel for respondents is heard on I.A. No.19/2024 and I.A.
No.343/2024 vacating stay.
Shri N.S. Ruprah has submitted that the order assailed in this writ appeal
is primarily based on the judgment of Single Bench dated 29.11.2022 in W.P.
No.23828/2022 (Harshit Jain and others Vs. State of M.P. and another). It is
further informed by Shri Ruprah that the said decision of Single Bench in
Harshit Jain (supra) was upheld by the Division Bench by dismissal of Writ
Appeal No.1706/2022 (Dipendra Yadav Vs. State) on 25.02.2023. It is also
pointed out that the decision of Division Bench in Dipendra Yadav (supra) is
challenged in SLP (C) 5817/2023 wherein by interim order dated 10.04.2023,
the Apex Court while issuing notice has declined to grant any stay and instead
has made the proceedings/process pursuant to the advertisement in question
subject to the final orders in SLP. It is further informed that the said SLP
Signature Notcontinues
Verified to be pending till date. The aforesaid interim order is subsisting till
Signed by: SHIBA
NARAYAN BISWAL date. In the aforesaid background, Shri N.S. Ruprah contends that once the
Signing time: 2/13/2024
7:11:45 PM
Apex Court declined grant of stay in the matter, it necessarily follows that the
verdict in the case of Harshit Jain (supra) and the impugned order herein
become executable and, therefore, the stay granted by Co-ordinate Bench of
this Court on 19.12.2023 in the present appeal runs counter to the intent of the
Apex Court declining grant of stay.
It is not disputed at the Bar that SLP (C) 5817/2023 in the case of
Dipendra Yadav (supra) is pending adjudication before Apex Court where all
subsequent processes pursuant to impugned advertisement have been made
subject to the final outcome. The Apex Court has now listed the said SLP on
14.02.2024 as part heard.
In the given facts and circumstances, especially in the backdrop of the
Apex Court being ceased of the matter, in the fitness of things and in the
interest of propriety and judicial discipline, it would be appropriate for this
Court to await the verdict of Apex Court before proceeding ahead on merit.
Accordingly, no case is made out for the time being for vacating the
interim order passed by this Court on 19.12.2023. Consequently, I.A.
No.19/2024 and I.A. No.343/2024 vacating stay stand rejected.
As regards application for intervention filed by various candidates who
are not impleaded in these bunch of petitions, learned Advocate General - Shri
Prashant Singh brought to the notice of this Court an order passed by Single
Judge Bench of this Court on 07.10.2023 in W.P. No.25087/2023 holding that
the judgment earlier rendered in Vaishali Wadhwani is a judgment in rem.
In view of above, since the judgment in the case of Vaishali Wadhwani
has been declared to be judgment in rem, the applications for intervention as
well as impleading parties (I.A. No.17768/2023, I.A. No.17470/2023,
A.No.17985/202, I.A. No.18519/2023, I.A. No.249/2024 and I.A. No.336/2024)
have become infructuous, are dismissed as such.
List the present appeal awaiting verdict of Apex Court in SLP (C)
5817/2023 in the week commencing 26.02.2024.
(SHEEL NAGU) (VINAY SARAF)
JUDGE JUDGE
Biswal
