Umesh Kumar Patel vs Sanjay Goyal Secretary
2025 Latest Caselaw 7529 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Umesh Kumar Patel vs Sanjay Goyal Secretary on 3 April, 2025

Author: Avanindra Kumar Singh

Bench: Avanindra Kumar Singh

                                                              1                              CONC-3496-2024
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT JABALPUR
                                                     CONC No. 2542 of 2024
                                         (RAJMANI SHRIVASTAVA Vs SHRI SANJAY GOYAL AND OTHERS )

                                CONC/2222/2024, CONC/2253/2024, CONC/2254/2024, CONC/2270/2024,
                                CONC/2406/2024, CONC/2407/2024, CONC/2408/2024, CONC/2428/2024,
                                CONC/2541/2024, CONC/2645/2024, CONC/2646/2024, CONC/2647/2024,
                                CONC/2648/2024, CONC/2707/2024, CONC/2711/2024, CONC/2753/2024,
                                CONC/2754/2024, CONC/2828/2024, CONC/2833/2024, CONC/2856/2024,
                                CONC/2858/2024, CONC/2860/2024, CONC/2862/2024, CONC/2937/2024,
                                CONC/3005/2024, CONC/3029/2024, CONC/3030/2024, CONC/3031/2024,
                                CONC/3048/2024, CONC/3064/2024, CONC/3071/2024, CONC/3111/2024,
                                CONC/3128/2024, CONC/3195/2024, CONC/3227/2024, CONC/3228/2024,
                                       CONC/3233/2024, CONC/3496/2024, CONC/4546/2024
                          Dated : 03-04-2025
                                Parties through their respective counsel.

                                The bunch of cases is listed today. The basic contention of learned
                          counsel for the petitioners in the contempt cases is that initially the writ court
                          passed an order in the case of Surendra Kumar Gupta and Mahesh Gunjele.
                          That order was challenged upto Hon'ble Supreme Court and ultimately
                          appoint was given. Thereafter similarly placed other persons also approached
                          the writ court and writ court directed for giving appointment but they were
                          denied appointment on the ground that those posts have been abolished in
                          the year 2007. Again challenge to that order was made before this court and

                          in W.P. No.1449 of 2013, vide dated 8.3.2016 in the case of Brijbhushan
                          Sharma, this Court remitted the matter back to the D.P.I. with the direction
                          to consider the case again by the competent administrative authority in the
                          light of order dated 26.11.2015 and W.A. No.1187 of 2013 (Mahesh Gunjele
                          Vs. State of M.P. and another) after quashing the impugned order dated
                          1.12.2012. It is submitted that thereafter again the appointment is denied.
                                At the outset learned counsel for the State submits that the compliance

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: BASANT KUMAR
SHRIVAS
Signing time: 4/4/2025
5:53:58 PM
                                                            2                            CONC-3496-2024

                          has been done. All connected petitioners approached the court after posts
                          were abolished but learned counsel for the petitioners in Contempt Case No.
                          2542 of 2024 (Rajmani Shrivastava Vs. Shri Sanjay Goyal and others)
                          pointed out that they have filed rejoinder to the compliance report in which
                          they have annexed Original Application No.729 of 1999 (Smt. Rajmani
                          Shrivastava Vs. State of M.P. and others), order dated 10.9.1999 proving that
                          the matter has not been carefully examined by the relevant respondents -

authorities.

At this juncture, Shri Bharat Singh submits that if this is the case, he will personally examine each and every case threadbare to see that at what level the mistake has taken place as rejection order in all connected cases is

of similar nature and rejected on the same ground. Therefore the case is adjourned.

It is also seen that Annexure C-5 annexed with the rejoinder is not legible and first page is annexed and there is no second page annexed with the rejoinder.

Learned counsel for the petitioners also submit that the respondents are trying to mislead this court submitting that in the year 2007 the posts were abolished. Infact permanent posts having a pay band were not abolished. Only temporary posts on fixed salary were abolished.

It is also submitted that when the order was already quashed by Hon'ble Court in W.P. No.1449 of 2013, vide dated 8.3.2016, then there can not be fresh rejection on the same ground which was already quashed whereas learned counsel for the State submits that they have filed the

3 CONC-3496-2024 compliance report on the basis of judgment passed and other cases involving the similar issue and one of that order is passed by the Hon'ble Coordinate bench Contempt Petition Civil No. 1020 of 2016 (Rajendra Kumar Tiwari and others vs. Shri Neeraj Duby), vide dated 4.4.2022 and other connected matters and order of Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A. No.1236 of 2022 (Shiv Kumar Khare and others Vs. the State of M.P. and others) vide dated 20th September 2024.

List alongwith Contempt Case No.3227 of 2024. in the week commencing 13th of May 2025 to get valuable assistance from the relevant authorities so that they personally apprise the situation.

Simultaneously respondent nos. 1 and 2 are directed to appear on the next date through V.C.

(AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH) JUDGE

bks