Madhya Pradesh High Court
Hemlata Singh Thakur vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 November, 2025
Author: Maninder S. Bhatti
Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:61213
1 WP-44918-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
ON THE 26th OF NOVEMBER, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 44918 of 2025
HEMLATA SINGH THAKUR AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Viraaj Shanker Jha - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Vinod Mishra - Panel Lawyer for the State.
ORDER
This petition is filed challenging the action of respondents in
excluding the petitioners from the process of appointment as Samvida Shala
Shikshak Grade-3 on the ground that they have not secured the minimum
aggregate marks in the eligibility examination.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that similar issue has
been decided by this Court in WP No. 13256 of 2025 which is as under:-
"2. Counsel appearing for the petitioner has pointed out
that the circular which has been relied upon by the
respondents to decide the representation has already
been quashed by this Court in the earlier round of
litigation in W. P. No.1688/2009 (Sarbar Khan v. State
of M.P. and others) decided on 24.08.2009. Therefore,
the same cannot be taken into consideration. She further
submits that the case of the petitioner is squarely
covered by the judgment passed by this Court in the
case of Smita Shrivastava v. State of M.P. and others
which has attained finality upto the Hon'ble Supreme
Court by order dated 03.05.2024 passed in SLP (C) No.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:61213
2 WP-44918-2025
(S) 23966-23968 of 2022). Under these circumstances,
petitioner's counsel prays that authority may be directed
to reconsider the case of the petitioner and pass a fresh
order.
3. State Counsel could not dispute the factum of passing
of the order in the case of Sarbar Khan (supra) order
dated 24.08.2009 wherein the circular relied upon by
the respondents was quashed by this Court holding it to
be ultra vires. He fairly submits that the case of the
petitioner will be reconsidered by the authorities in
terms of the judgment passed by the Court in case of
Smita Shrivastava (supra).
4. Under these circumstances, this petition is disposed
off directing the respondent No.3 to reconsider the case
of the petitioner in light of the judgment passed in the
case of Smita Shrivastava (supra). Respondents are
further directed to take note of the order passed by this
Court in W. P. No.1688/2009 order dated 24.08.2009.
5. In view of the aforesaid the impugned order dated
16.04.2024 (Annexure P/7) passed by the respondent
No.2 is hereby quashed. The entire proceedings be
completed within a period of 90 days from the date of
receipt of certified copy of this order."
3. In view of the aforesaid, the present petition is disposed of
directing the petitioners to submit a fresh representation within a period of 15
days. If the said representation is submitted within a period of 15 days, then
the authorities shall decide the same in same terms as in case of Ramkishore
Sahu (supra) by examining the case of the petitioners in terms of the
judgments in the case of Smita Shrivastava (supra) and Sarbar Khan (supra)
within a further period of 2 months. The petition stands disposed of.
(MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE
PB
