Madhya Pradesh High Court
Parasram Kushwah vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16712
1 WP-23989-2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ASHISH SHROTI
ON THE 6 th OF AUGUST, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 23989 of 2021
PARASRAM KUSHWAH AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri S.K. Sharma - learned counsel and Shri Sangam Kumar Jain-
learned counsel for the petitioners.
Shri K.K. Prajapati- learned Government Advocate for the
respondents/State.
ORDER
1. The petitioners have filed the present writ petition praying for
following reliefs:-
"(i) That, petitioners be allowed to continue in
their respective cadre and an opportunity be extended to
them to obtain requisite qualification from the institute
recognized by NCTE.
(ii) That, any disciplinary action against the
petitioners be held to be unjust and unrequired and be
quashed.
(iii) That, any other relief which this Hon'ble
High Court may deem fit, with cost of the petition."
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16712
2 WP-23989-2021
2. The facts as gathered from the record are that the petitioners
completed their D.Ed. Course in the year 2011 from CMJ University,
Meghalaya and based upon the said qualification, the petitioners applied for
and were selected on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III. They
were so appointed on 06/07/2013. Later on, on the recommendation of the
Committee, the petitioners were absorbed in Sahayak Adhyapak Cadre on
20/12/2016 (Annexure-P/3). Later one, vide order dated 06/10/2018
(Annexure-P/4), the petitioners were appointed as Teacher.
3. It appears that some enquiry was conducted by the Assistant
Director, Public Instruction, Gwalior Division, Gwalior in relation to
petitioners' qualification of D.Ed. As per the enquiry report Annexure-P/7, it
has been held that even though institution from which the petitioners
acquired the said D.Ed. qualification is affiliated by UGC but is not approved
by NCTE. From the return filed by the respondents, it appears that some
show-cause notice was issued to the petitioners asking them to explain as to
why their services be not terminated and the amount be not recovered which
they have secured based upon the qualification which is not acceptable.
Copy of this show-cause notice is not brought on record. It is submitted by
the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have already
submitted the reply of the said show-cause notice.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that even if the
petitioners' qualification is not acceptable, there is no malafide intention on
the part of the petitioners in securing the appointment based upon the
aforesaid qualification. In fact, they submitted the certificates at the time of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16712
3 WP-23989-2021
appointment and after due verification, respondents accepted the same and
appointed the petitioners on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III.
He further submitted that even if the aforesaid qualification is not acceptable,
the petitioners may be granted an opportunity for acquiring the qualification
which is required for appointment on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak
Grade- III.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance upon the order
passed by this Court in the case of Sadhu Singh Gurjar and others Vs. State
of M.P. and others (W.P. No.1460/2015) wherein in the similar
circumstances, this Court issued the similar directions. This order has been
subsequently followed in various cases including the case of Devdatt
Kushwah & another Vs. State of M.P. & another (W.P.No.5368/2017), Ray
Singh Baghel Vs. State of M.P. & Ors. (W.P. No.3076/2020) and Dinesh
Kumar Rajput and another Vs. State of M.P. & others (W.P.
No.15481/2024).
6. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate for the
respondents/State submitted that no action has been taken against the
petitioners so far and, therefore, there is no cause of action to file the present
writ petition. He further submitted that the qualification acquired by the
petitioners is not acceptable for appointment on the post of Samvida Shala
Shikshak Grade-III as the same is not approved by NCTE. Learned counsel
for the respondents further submitted that show-cause notice was issued to
the petitioners to which the reply has been submitted by the petitioners and
the matter shall now be finalized by the respondents authorities in
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16712
4 WP-23989-2021
accordance with law.
7. Considered the arguments and perused the record.
8. This Court has considered the similar issue in the case of Sadhu
Singh Gurjar (supra) wherein in para 8, this Court passed the following
directions:-
"8. Prayer appears to be reasonable. There is no dispute that
petitioners have so far performed duties as teachers either as
Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-II/III or in Adhyapak Samvarg
with utmost satisfaction of the superiors with unblemished service
record. They have completed more than ten years of service as on
date. Bhartiya Shiksha Parishad Lucknow though is not in the list
of recognized institute of the NCTE but undisputedly is
recognized by UGC, a higher body and/or above NCTE. Teachers
having obtained D.Ed./B.Ed. from such institute are serving as
teachers in different States. Therefore, it is equitable that the
petitioners are permitted to continue in their respective cadre
either in the Adhyapak Samvarg, if they are already absorbed or in
Samvida Shala Shikshak Varg II and III, further for a period of
three years and an opportunity is extended to them to obtain
D.Ed./B.Ed. qualification, as the case may be, from the institute
recognized by the NCTE."
9. The aforesaid judgment passed by this Court has been followed in
several other cases.
10. Like in the case of Sadhu Singh Gurjar (supra) , in the present case
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16712
5 WP-23989-2021
also CMJ University, Meghalaya was recognized by UGC but its course is
not approved by NCTE as stated in the enquiry report Annexure P/7. There is
no allegation that the petitioners obtained the appointment by some illegal
means. The certificate of qualification was duly furnished by them and the
respondents, after considering the same, appointed the petitioners. Therefore,
the petitioners deserve the similar direction which has been given by this
Court in the case of Sadhu Singh Gurjar (supra) .
11. Considering the aforesaid, this writ petition is disposed off
directing the respondents that in case any adverse action is to be taken
against the petitioners based upon their D.Ed. qualification, they may be
given an opportunity to acquire the qualification which is acceptable for
appointment on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III in view of the
order passed by this Court in the case of Sadhu Singh Gurjar (supra) .
12. With the aforesaid, this writ petition is disposed off.
(ASHISH SHROTI)
JUDGE
rahul
