Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Vineeta Dehariya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 July, 2022

Author: Maninder S Bhatti

Bench: Maninder S Bhatti

                                                                     1
                                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                             AT JABALPUR
                                                                   BEFORE
                                                   HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S BHATTI
                                                              ON THE 8th OF JULY, 2022

                                                      WRIT PETITION No. 14253 of 2022

                                            Between:-
                                            VINEETA DEHARIYA D/O SHRI NETRAM
                                            DEHARIYA , AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
                                            OCCUPATION: NIL R/O VILLAGE MUKAM
                                            SURLAKHAPA, POST SURLAKHAPA TAHSIL
                                            MARRAI   DISTRICT  CHHINDWARA  M.P.
                                            (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                               .....PETITIONER
                                            (BY SHRI Y. SHUKLA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
                                            PETITIONER)

                                            AND

                                      1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                                            SECRETARY       SCHOOL      EDUCATION
                                            DEPARTMENT BHOPAL M.P. DISTRICT BHOPAL
                                            M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                      2.    MADHYA        PRADESH     PROFESSIONAL
                                            EXAMINATION BOARD, THROUGH CHAIRMAN
                                            CHAYAN BHAWAN, MAIN ROAD NO.1, CHINAR
                                            PARK (EAST) BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                      3.    DEPARTMENT   OF   EDUCATION, THROUGH
                                            DIRECTOR GAUTAM NAGAR, HOUSING BOARD
                                            COLONY (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                      4.    DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, CHHINDWARA
                                            PROFESSOR COLONY, CHHINDWARA (MADHYA
                                            PRADESH)

                                                                                            .....RESPONDENTS
                                            (BY SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR PANDEY, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR
                                            THE RESPONDENTS/STATE.)
                                            ( BY SHRI RAHUL DIWAKER, LEARNED COUNSEL ALONG WITH
Signature Not Verified                      SHRI SHUBHAM RAI, COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.2)
  SAN




Digitally signed by PARMESHWAR GOPE
                                           Th is petition coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
Date: 2022.07.09 17:21:09 IST
                                                                           2
                                      following:
                                                                             ORDER

The petitioner has filed this petition while praying for following reliefs:-

"7.(i) Issue an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to extend the benefit to the Petitioner for purpose of selection in Middle School Teacher Grade-2 and revise the results accordingly;
(ii) Any other relief which this Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case;
(iii) Costs of the petition be awarded to the petitioner;"

As per the facts narrated in the petition, the petitioner herein, who was working as a Guest Faculty applied for selection against the post of Middle School Teacher and accordingly, participated in the Middle School Teacher Eligibility Test, 2018 conducted by Professional Examination Board. After declaration of result, the petitioner was not selected having scored 94.79 proportionate marks and further scored 92.63 normalised marks, which is evident from perusal of Annexure P/6.

The grievance of the petitioner is that her marks are more than the candidates whose names appeared at Serial Nos. 248, 249 and 250 in the select list. The petitioner submits that she having scored 94.79 proportionate marks ought to have been selected inasmuch as the candidates at Serial Nos. 248, 249 and 250 scored less marks than the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment as Middle Signature Not Verified SAN School Teacher.

Digitally signed by PARMESHWAR GOPE

Date: 2022.07.09 17:21:09 IST The counsel for the Professional Examination Board, while appearing on 3 advance notice submits that the candidates whose name appear at Serial Nos. 248, 249 and 250 belongs to EWS, unreserved and OBC category respectively whereas the present petitioner belongs to female SC category.

While taking this court to Serial No. 212 page-28 of the petition submits that the cut-off in the category of SC female category is 108.91 therefore, the petitioner having applied in female SC category was not entitled to be considered therefore, submits that the prayer as made in the petition is mis- conceived.

Having heard the rival submissions, this court is of the considered opinion that from perusal of page-28 of the petition, it is palpably clear that the petitioner being a candidate in female SC category, did not deserve to be appointed inasmuch as, the cut-off was 108.91 marks whereas petitioner scored 94.79 marks, therefore, no case is made out for interference.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed.

(MANINDER S BHATTI) JUDGE PG Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by PARMESHWAR GOPE Date: 2022.07.09 17:21:09 IST