Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sanjay Sahu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 October, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:51129
1 WA-1186-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT,
CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK JAIN
ON THE 14th OF OCTOBER, 2024
WRIT APPEAL No. 1186 of 2023
SATENDRA LODHI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri N.S. Ruprah, learned counsel for appellant.
Shri Amit Seth, learned Additional Advocate General for respondents/State.
Shri Rahul Diwakar and Shri Aman Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.4.
WITH
WRIT APPEAL No. 80 of 2023
SANJAY SAHU AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Dinesh Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for appellants.
Shri Amit Seth, learned Additional Advocate General for respondents/State.
Shri Rahul Diwakar and Shri Aman Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No.4.
ORDER
Per: Hon'ble Shri Justice Suresh Kumar Kait, Chief Justice
These appeals have been preferred by the appellants against the order
dated 19.12.2022 passed by the learned Single Bench in W.P.
No.27312/2022, whereby the writ petition was disposed of with direction to
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:51129
2 WA-1186-2023
the respondents to consider their representations to be made before the
Additional Director General of Police (Selection), Bhopal within 15 days.
2. The appellants in the present appeals have averred that they had
participated in the selection process for the post of Constable in M.P. Police
and have cleared the written test and physical proficiency test. The appellants
have claimed that they belong to different categories and in the final result
they were shown as fail. The appellants are aggrieved that they were not
finally selected for the said post and thus they made the representations
before the competent authority which were not answered and they filed the
writ petition before the learned Single Bench.
The appellants have also submitted that the learned Single Bench
while dismissing the appellants' writ petition observed that another writ
petition being W.P. No.26933/2022 (Raksha Patel and others vs. State of
M.P. and others) seeking the similar relief had already been dismissed on
30.11.2022 and so, no case was made out.
3. The appellants in the present appeals have contended that judgment in
the case of Raksha Patel (supra) has been set aside by the Division Bench of
this Court vide order dated 13.06.2023 in W.A. No.1609/2022 and therefore,
the order dated 19.12.2022 deserves to be set aside. In the said case, it is held
that condition for possession of 'live employment exchange registration card'
cannot be treated as a mandatory condition which may lead to cancellation of
candidature and, therefore, this Court in Raksha Patel (supra) had directed
the competent authority to reconsider the candidature of all those applicants
in the said case.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:51129
3 WA-1186-2023
4. The appellants in the present appeals have averred that they are poor
persons, belonging to a poor strata of the society and they could not get their
registration renewed up to 01.02.2022 and have thus, prayed that the order
dated 19.12.2022 passed by the learned Single Bench be set aside and a
direction be issued to respondents No.2/3 on parity basis to issue
appointment order in favour of the appellants giving the same relief as given
in W.A. No.1609/2022.
5. This Court has gone through the order dated 19.12.2022 passed by
learned Single Judge.
6. Upon going through the said order, we find that the learned Single Judge
in respect of those petitioners whose employment exchange cards were alive
before submission of online applications, directed to consider their case
whereas in respect of those petitioners who were not having live employment
exchange cards on the date of application, their case was dismissed in terms
of the order passed by this Court in W.P. No.26922/2022. However, this
Court in Raksha Patel (Supra) has held that condition for possession of 'live
employment exchange registration card' cannot be treated as a mandatory
condition which may lead to cancellation of candidature.
7. In view of the aforesaid, these appeals are accordingly allowed with
direction to the respondents to consider the case of appellants in ignoring the
requirement of live registration certificate with employment exchange and
consider their candidature based upon their merit within two weeks from
today.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:51129
4 WA-1186-2023
8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents have pointed out
that the similar issue is seized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of State
of Madhya Pradesh and another vs. Ajay Pal Yadav and another in SLP
(Civil) Diary No.51812/2023. It is further pointed out that in the case of Writ
Appeal No.1062/2024, this Court granted the liberty to the State to revisit the
Court in case Apex Court passes any order in favour of the State in SLP (C)
No.026593-026594/2023. The said direction shall also remain in force in the
present case as well.
9. The appeals are accordingly allowed in aforesaid terms.
(SURESH KUMAR KAIT) (VIVEK JAIN)
CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
psm
