Madhya Pradesh High Court
Hemant Kumar Jhariya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 19 May, 2025
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064
1 W.P. No.12480/2025
& connected petitions
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 19th OF MAY, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 12480 of 2025
PHOOL SINGH MALVIYA AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
............................................................................................................................................
Appearance:
Shri K.C. Ghildiyal - Senior Advocate with Shri Aditya Singh Thakur -
Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Swapnil Ganguly - Deputy Advocate General for the
respondents/State.
............................................................................................................................................
WITH
WRIT PETITION No. 13216 of 2025
HEMANT KUMAR JHARIYA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
............................................................................................................................................
Appearance:
Shri Vaibhav Kumar Pandey - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Swapnil Ganguly - Deputy Advocate General for the
respondents/State.
............................................................................................................................................
WRIT PETITION No. 13448 of 2025
RAMDAS ARJUNWAR
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
............................................................................................................................................
Appearance:
Shri Vaibhav Tiwari - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Swapnil Ganguly - Deputy Advocate General for the
respondents/State.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHUBHANKAR
MISHRA
Signing time: 28-05-2025
11:41:05
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064
2 W.P. No.12480/2025
& connected petitions
............................................................................................................................................
WRIT PETITION No. 13768 of 2025
MANOJ KUMAR BILTHARE AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
............................................................................................................................................
Appearance:
Shri Vaibhav Tiwari - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Swapnil Ganguly - Deputy Advocate General for the
respondents/State.
............................................................................................................................................
WRIT PETITION No. 14443 of 2025
SMT. JAILAKHSMI SHRIVASTAVA AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
............................................................................................................................................
Appearance:
Shri Uttam Maheshwari - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Swapnil Ganguly - Deputy Advocate General for the
respondents/State.
............................................................................................................................................
WRIT PETITION No. 15161 of 2025
PRAKASH KUMAR LANDGE AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
............................................................................................................................................
Appearance:
Shri Sandeep Singh Baghel - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Swapnil Ganguly - Deputy Advocate General for the
respondents/State.
............................................................................................................................................
ORDER
As common relief of issuance of direction to the Authorities to convene a DPC for consideration of cases of the petitioners for promotion is being claimed in all these Writ Petitions (i.e. W.P. No.12480/2025, W.P. No.13216/2025, W.P. No.13448/2025, W.P. Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064 3 W.P. No.12480/2025 & connected petitions No.13768/2025, W.P. No.14443/2025 & W.P. No.15161/2025), therefore, these Writ Petitions are taken up for consideration analogously and being decided by this common order.
2. For the sake of convenience, facts of W.P. No.12480/2025 are taken note of.
3. This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed seeking following reliefs:-
7.1 A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the Respondents to hold the DPC for promotion from the post of Joint Director, Deputy Director, Assistant Director, Senior Agriculture Development Officer, Agriculture Development Officer, Agriculture Development Officer and Agriculture Extension Officer and promote the Petitioners to the post of Additional Director, Joint Director, Deputy Director, Assistant Director and Senior Agriculture Development Officer and Agriculture Development Officer with all consequential benefits.
7.2 Any other appropriate writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case including cost of the litigation.
4. It is pointed out that petitioners have completed requisite years of qualifying service on feeder post and are entitled for promotion to the next higher post. The Authorities are not convening any DPC for considering the cases of the petitioners for promotion despite availability of vacant posts in several cadres. It is argued that the reason assigned by the Authorities in not holding the DPC is stated to be an interim order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court staying holding of Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064 4 W.P. No.12480/2025 & connected petitions DPC in the State of Madhya Pradesh. It is argued that the same is not correct as the initial order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court staying convening of DPC for promotion was subsequently clarified by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its order dated 10/04/2023 passed in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh & Another Vs. Vinay Kumar Babele in SLP(C) No.5868/2023, filed in this petition as Annexure-P/8.
5. It is argued that thereafter several orders have been passed by this Court considering the clarification issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and directed for holding of review DPC in the matter. It is further argued that the orders passed by this Court have also been implemented by the State Authorities and promotion orders have been issued after convening review DPC in the matter. Therefore, petitioners being similarly situated pray for a mandamus directing the Authorities to consider the cases of petitioners for promotion by holding DPC in the matter.
6. Learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State submits that the State Authorities are in a process of taking Policy decision in the matter for holding of DPC for promotion with respect to employees in the State of Madhya Pradesh as the said drive for promotion has not taken place for a long time. It is further pointed out that identical matters are under consideration before the Division Bench of this Court. As the Division Bench is seized with the matter, therefore he prays for adjourning the matter. On earlier occasion also, time was prayed by learned Deputy Advocate General pointing out the fact that an application seeking clarification from the Hon'ble Supreme Court was filed and the same is pending consideration. It is further contended that contempt proceedings were filed seeking non-compliance of orders Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064 5 W.P. No.12480/2025 & connected petitions passed by this Court on several occasions and in one such matter, the matter traveled up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 22/10/2024 has taken cognizance in the matter in Conmt.Pet.(c) No.766-768/2024 and it was ordered that "the respondents were not required to personally appear before the High Court". Therefore, virtually the contempt proceedings were kept in abeyance. It is submitted that there is situation of chaos created as several contradictory orders are passed by various Benches of this Court. One directing for holding of DPC in view of the clarification issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and other directing for keeping the DPC in abeyance owing to the fact that the Hon'ble Supreme Court is seized with the matter. It is argued that the matters are coming up for consideration before the Division Bench after ensuing summer vacation, therefore, prayer for adjournment is made.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently opposed the contentions pointing out the fact that they are only claiming their consideration for promotion. They are not asking any mandamus directing for grant of promotion to them. The right of consideration cannot be curtailed by the State Authorities specifically in circumstances when the State Authorities have adopted a pick and choose method and in those cases wherein directions have been issued by this Court for holding a DPC for consideration of cases of promotion, the State Government is holding a DPC and considering the cases of promotion and virtually, passing orders of promotion in the matter. At the relevant time, the ground taken by the respondents that there is a rider by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in holding of DPC does not come in the way of the respondents. They are blowing both hot & cold at the same time Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064 6 W.P. No.12480/2025 & connected petitions which is not permissible once they have adopted the Policy of pick and choose to hold a DPC in the matter, which is not permissible. If the Authorities are holding DPC for some of the employees, then they should hold the DPC for consideration of cases of all the employees in the State of Madhya Pradesh who are eligible for promotion. The respondents cannot discriminate the similarly situated employees on the ground that there are orders passed by the Court in their favour. Under these circumstances, they have prayed for disposal of these Writ Petitions with a direction to the Authorities to hold a review DPC for consideration of cases of the petitioners in the light of clarification issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
9. In all these petitions, a limited prayer is made to direct the Authorities to hold a DPC for consideration of cases of the employees for promotion. It is not disputed that the promotion drive has not taken place for a long time by the State Government on the ground that the reservation matters are pending consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and there is a rider put by the State Government that no DPC to take place in the matter till the lis is decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
10. However, the fact remains that there is a clarification to the interim order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. R.B. Rai, SLP No.13954/2016, which was considered by this Court in the case of Dhirendra Chaturvedi Vs. State of M.P. and others vide order dated 16/04/2019 in W.P. No.13241/2017. The relevant is as under:-
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064 7 W.P. No.12480/2025 & connected petitions "10. As far as the second aspect that the Apex Court has granted status quo order in case of R.B. Rai (supra), order of promotion cannot be issued in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner has placed reliance upon an order passed in W.P. No.45/2017 (Kushal Singh Vs. Revenue Department) decided vide order dated 04.10.2017, in which, the High Court after taking note of the order of status quo passed by the Supreme Court in SLP No.13954/2016 in case of State of M.P. and others Vs. R.B. Rai, has observed that the said order would not come in the way in a case where issue of reservation is not involved. Here in this case also no issue regarding reservation is involved because the petitioner being a candidate of General Category is claiming promotion. Not only this, but in an advice taken from the Government of India as to whether promotion can be made to the officers of the Government as there is an order of status quo in a pending SLP before the Supreme Court. The clarification was made vide Office Memorandum dated 15th June, 2018 by the Government of India, in which, the State Government was also advised to take necessary action in accordance with the advice given in the said memorandum wherein the Government of India has clarified that there is no bar to issue the order of promotion of the officers asking promotion from unreserved category. It is clarified in the memorandum that at the most the order of promotion may contain a condition that, the same would be subjected to the final decision of the pending SLP before the Supreme Court.Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064 8 W.P. No.12480/2025 & connected petitions The Office Memorandum dated 15th June, 2018 is as follows:-
"F.No.36012/11/2016-Estt.(Res-I){Pt-II} Government of India Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions Department of Personnel & Training Establishment (Reservation-I) Section ***** North Block, New Delhi Dated June 15, 2018 OFFICE MEMORANDUM Subject: Implementation of interim Orders/ directions in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.30621/2011 arising out of final judgment and order dated 15.07.2011 in CWP No.13218/2009 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana and Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.31288/2017 arising out of Hon'ble Delhi High Court judgment dated 23.08.2017 and other related court cases- regarding **** The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 15.11.2007 in SLP (C) No.28306/2017 has decided to refer to a Constitution Bench to examine whether its earlier decision in M. Nagraj and others Vs. Union of India and others requires reconsideration or not, inter alia, on the issue as to whether test of backwardness would, at all, apply in case of SC Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064 9 W.P. No.12480/2025 & connected petitions and ST.
2. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) No.30621/2011 has passed the following order on 17.05.2018:
"It is directed that the pendency of this Special Leave Petition shall not stand in the way of Union of India taking steps for the purpose of promotion from 'reserved to reserved' and 'unreserved to unreserved' and also in the matter of promotion on merits ................"
3. Further, in the matter related to SLP (C) No.31288/2017, connected to Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.28306/2017, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under on 05.06.2018:
"Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned ASG has referred to order dated 17.05.2018 in SLP (C) No.30621/2011. It is made clear that the Union of India is not debarred from making promotions in accordance with law, subject to further orders, pending further consideration of the matter. Tag to SLP (C) No.30621 of 2011."
4. The cadre controlling authorities of Central Government Ministries, Departments and Union Territories are to carry out Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064 10 W.P. No.12480/2025 & connected petitions promotions in accordance with the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court mentioned in paragraphs 2 and 3 above based on existing seniority/ select lists.
5. Every promotion order must clearly mention the stipulation that the promotion shall be subject to further orders which may be passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
6. All Ministries/ Departments are requested to bring this to the notice of all concerned for information/ compliance.
7. State Governments are also advised to take necessary action in accordance with the above mentioned orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
(G. Srinivasan) Deputy Secretary to the Government of India Tel. : 23093074 To:
1. The Secretaries of all Ministries/ Departments of the Government of India.
2. Chief Secretaries of all State Governments.
3. Shri Maninder Singh, Learned Additional Solicitor General of India.
4. Department of Financial Services, New Delhi.
5. Department of Public Enterprises, New Delhi
6. Railway Board, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhavan, New Delhi.
7. Supreme Court of India/ Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064 11 W.P. No.12480/2025 & connected petitions Election Commission of India/ Lok Sabha Secretariat/ Rajya Sabha Secretariat/ Cabinet Secretariat/ Central Vigilance Commission/ President's Secretariat/ Vice President's Secretariat/ Prime Minister's Office/ Niti Ayog.
8. Union Public Service Commission/ Staff Selection Commission.
9. Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, New Delhi.
10. Ministry of Tribal Affairs, New Delhi.
11. National Commission for Scheduled Castes, Lok Nayak Bhawan, New Delhi.
12. National Commission for Scheduled Tribes, Lok Nayak Bhawan, New Delhi.
13. National Commission for Backward Classes, Trikoot-
1, Bhikaji Cama Place, R. K. Puram, New Delhi.
14. Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.
15. Information and Facilitation Center, Dopt, North Block, New Delhi.
16. Director, ISTM, Old JNU Campus, Olof Plame Marg, New Delhi 110067.
17. NIC, Dopt - to upload the same on Dopt website.
18. Hindi Section for providing the Hindi translation."
In view of the above, when the petitioner is otherwise found eligible to be promoted to the post of Additional Director and posts fallen vacant during life time of the panel prepared by the DPC and the representation was made by the petitioner asking his promotion qua availability of vacancies, rejection taking shelter of the order of the status quo in the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064 12 W.P. No.12480/2025 & connected petitions case of R.B. Rai (supra) does not seem to be proper. The order of status quo has been passed by the Apex Court in respect of the fallout of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court whereby the rules were struck down and pursuant to which ineligible employees were likely to be reverted. The status quo order, therefore, can be considered to avoid such a situation and to revert the ineligible employee who have granted promotion by applying the provisions of the Promotion Rules, 2002, that is basically without following the direction of the Apex Court in case of M. Nagraj (supra) as the State Government has not assessed the quantifying data."
11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court again on 10/04/2023 in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. Vs. Vinay Kumar Babele in SLP(C) No.5868/2023 has passed the following order:-
"Heard the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the petitioners.
We make it clear that grant of promotions will be subject to the final outcome of all relevant pending Special leave Petitions.
Subject to above observation, no case for interference is made out in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. The Special Leave Petitions are accordingly dismissed.
Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of."
12. From the perusal of aforesaid observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is apparently clear that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has not put the promotion drive on hold, rather it was made clear that grant of promotion will be subject to the final outcome of all relevant Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064 13 W.P. No.12480/2025 & connected petitions pending Special Leave Petitions, which makes it clear that the promotion drive was not put to hold by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
13. This Court again in the case of Vikash Bhardwaj and Others Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others vide order dated 25/09/2024 passed in W.P. No.28360/2024 has considered the similar situation and ordered as under:-
"Heard on the question of admission. By the instant petition, the petitioners are seeking a direction for the respondents to convene a DPC for their promotion from the post of Taxation Assistant to the post of Assistant Commercial Tax Officers and if the petitioners are found fit, they be promoted on the said post.
In contrast, Shri Kekre, learned counsel appearing for the respondents-State submits that in pursuance to the order passed by the Supreme Court for maintaining status quo, no DPC is being convened by the department.
Notably, copy of various orders have been made appendage to the petition. In that, there is an order passed by this Court in the case of Dhirendra Chaturvedi v. State of M.P. and others (W.P.No.13241/2017) on 16.04.2019, which was later-on followed by the coordinate bench in W.P.No.16777/2020 (Dr. Mukesh Sharma & Others v. The State of M.P. & Another) vide order dated 29.06.2022 and those orders were also affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court. Further, there is an order dated 27.02.2023 passed in W.P.No.27393/2019 (Sandeep Jaiswal & Ors. v. The State of M.P. & Anr.) wherein this Court directed that DPC be convened and if any promotions are made, those shall be subject to final decision of pending SLP(C) No.13954/2016 (State of M.P. v. R.B.Rai) before the Supreme Court. Further, the Division Bench vide order dated 15.12.2022 passed in W.A.No.1584/2022 Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064 14 W.P. No.12480/2025 & connected petitions (The State of M.P. & Anr. v. Dr. Vinay Kumar Babele) has observed that in pursuance to the clarification made by the Supreme Court, the direction given by the writ court directing the respondents to convene DPC does not call for any interference.
Over and above, the Supreme Court dismissed a petition i.e. SLP(C) No.5868/2023 (The State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. v. Vinay Kumar Babele) making it clear that grant of promotion will be subject to final outcome of pending SLP (State of M.P. & Anr. v. R.B. Rai).
Considering the current position and the fact that the Supreme Court has consistently been clarifying the position that merely because in pending SLP (State of M.P. & Anr. v. R.B. Rai) the order of status quo has been passed, the State Government cannot avoid DPCs, however, if any promotion is made, that shall be subject to final outcome of that SLP.
On the above strength, this petition is disposed of directing the respondents to convene a DPC and if found eligible, the petitioners may be granted promotion within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, although such promotions shall be subject to final decision of the pending SLP(C) No.13954/2016 (State of M.P. v. R.B.Rai) before the Supreme Court.
Petition stands disposed of."
14. Again this Court in the case of R.P. Gupta and Others Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others vide order dated 17/09/2024 passed in W.P. No.26382/2024 has taken note of the observations made by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.1584/2022 as well as the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vinay Kumar Babele (supra), and has ordered as under:-
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064 15 W.P. No.12480/2025 & connected petitions "6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.1584/2022, which is as under:-
"2. The sole ground for challenging the order passed in writ petition is that the subject matter is pending consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.13954 of 2016 (State of M.P. Vs. R.B.Rai) with regard to issue of reservation and promotion of Government employees. It is his case that till the matter is subjudice before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and an interim relief of maintaining status quo is pending consideration, the Authorities cannot convene a DPC for promotion of the employees but the counsel appearing for the appellant could not dispute the fact that in the order passed by the Gwalior Bench of this Court on 09.03.2022 in Writ Petition No.14029 of 2020 (Dr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma and others Vs. State of M.P. and another) and Single Bench decision of this Court in Writ Petition No.13241 of 2017 in the case of Dhirendra Chaturvedi Vs. State of M.P. decided on 16.04.2019 the issue with regard to pendency of SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of R.B.Rai (supra) has been considered, and considering the fact that certain modified orders have been issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court which are reflected from the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064 16 W.P. No.12480/2025 & connected petitions impugned order itself the present writ petition was disposed off holding that the decision will be applied mutatis mutandis to the case of the petitioner also. He could not dispute the fact that the aforesaid orders have not been put to challenge before any of the higher forums. He could not place on record any order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court modifying the earlier orders which were considered by this Court in Writ Petitions No.14029 of 2020 and 13241 of 2017.
3. In view of the overall facts and circumstances of the case and in the absence of any modified order by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the order passed by the learned Writ Court appears to be just and proper. The learned Single Judge has only directed the Authorities to convene a DPC in pursuance to the order which has already been passed in Writ Petition No.9998 of 2021 holding that the orders will apply mutatis mutandis to the case of the petitioner also."
15. From the perusal of aforesaid orders of this Court, it is apparently clear that there is no rider put by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in holding a DPC for consideration of cases for promotion. Another aspect which is noticeable is that the State Government is holding DPC for those employees who are getting orders from the Court and are organizing DPC for consideration of their cases for promotion and passing promotion orders also. One such order dated 27/02/2025 (Annexure- P/17) is filed along with this petition.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064 17 W.P. No.12480/2025 & connected petitions
16. It is pointed out that several orders have been passed with respect to other employees also and they have been promoted. The aforesaid fact is not disputed by learned Deputy Advocate General. He submits that some mistakes have been committed by the State Authorities in holding of DPC despite of the fact that lis is pending consideration before the Court.
17. However, the fact remains there is no answer which could be given by the State Authorities in adopting a pick and choose policy for consideration of cases of the employees for promotion by holding a DPC despite of the fact that their stand was that there is a rider from the Hon'ble Supreme Court in holding of the DPC. However, the fact remains that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has already passed a clarificatory order clarifying the position that they have not withhold the DPC, however, they have made all promotions subject to final outcome of the pending SLPs before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
18. Taking note of all the aforesaid orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as by this Court in several cases, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition with a direction to the Authorities to hold the DPC for consideration of cases of petitioners for promotion to the respective posts.
19. The entire exercise be completed within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
20. Needless to mention that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
21. With aforesaid observations, W.P. No.12480/2025, W.P. No.13216/2025, W.P. No.13448/2025, W.P. No.13768/2025, W.P. Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:25064 18 W.P. No.12480/2025 & connected petitions No.14443/2025 & W.P. No.15161/2025 stand finally disposed of. No order as to costs.
(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE Shbhnkr Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 28-05-2025 11:41:05