Madhya Pradesh High Court
Yasir Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 March, 2025
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:42861
1 WP-8136-2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 26th OF MARCH, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 8136 of 2022
YASIR KHAN
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Neerja Agrawal - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Gajendra Parashar - Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State.
ORDER
Assailing the order dated 31.03.2022 passed by the respondent No.2, whereby the services of the petitioner has been terminated owing to non- submission of the CPCT certificate, the present petition has been filed.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner's father Late Akram Khan was working as Assistant Grade-III with the respondent No.2 and he died in harness on 28.12.2017. The petitioner applied to the respondent No.2 for grant of compassionate appointment. Accordingly, vide order dated 10.08.2018, the respondent No.2 granted compassionate appointment to the petitioner on the post of Assistant Grade-IIIsubject to obtaining Computer Diploma and Computer Proficiency Certificate Test (CPCT) within a period of three years and posted him under the District Commandant, Homeguards, Vidhisha. As per the appointment order dated 10.08.2018, the petitioner was appointed in terms of the circular of the State Government dated 29.09.2014 which provides for grant of three years period for furnishing the CPCT Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANINDYA SUNDAR MUKHOPADHYAY Signing time: 10-09-2025 18:26:20 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:42861 2 WP-8136-2022 certificate with the proviso for extending the time period for a period of one year. It is argued by the counsel for the petitioner that benefit of extension of one year time period for obtaining the CPCT certificate was not extended to the petitioner. Thereafter, the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 12.04.2022 and this Court while considering the case for grant of interim relief has observed as under :-
"By the instant petition, the petitioner is raising grievance with regard to order passed by the authority on 31/03/2022 (Annexure-P-12), whereby services of the petitioner have been terminated because he has not submitted the requisite certificate of CPCT examination. Counsel for the petitioner submits that his appointment has been made in pursuance to the policy of the State Government (Annexure-P-2) and as per clause 6.5 of aforesaid policy three years' time has been granted to a candidate who has been appointed on compassionate basis for acquiring qualification. He further submits that the period of three years was expired in the month of 2021 and as per the policy if the said qualification is not acquired, the authority can extend a further period of one year and as such the said extended period would be ended in the month of August 2022. Counsel for the petitioner submits that since last so many years exam of CPCT could not be held, therefore, petitioner could not acquire the said qualification. He submits that in a similar circumstance benefit has been granted by this Court in W.P.No.1955/2022 by order dated 27/01/2022 prays that similar benefit be also granted to the petitioner. Considering the aforesaid, let notices be issued to the respondents on payment of process fee within a period of seven days by registered A.D. By way of interim measure, it is directed that operation of impugned order dated 31/03/2022 (Annexure-P-12) shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing and the petitioner may acquire the required qualification within the extended period, if that is not done then respondents Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANINDYA SUNDAR MUKHOPADHYAY Signing time: 10-09-2025 18:26:20 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:42861
3 WP-8136-2022 may take appropriate action."
3. In pursuance to the interim order granted by this Court, the petitioner continued in service.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that if one year extension is granted to the petitioner in terms of the policy/circular dated 29.09.2014 then four year period will expire in August, 2022 from the date of appointment. During the pendency of the petition, the petitioner has already cleared the CPCT examination as is reflected from the document annexed with the rejoinder pointing out the fact that the CPCT examination was cleared by the petitioner in July, 2022 (Annexure P-17). He has also obtained Diploma in Computer Application (DCA). Thus, in view of the fact that the petitioner has already obtained a CPCT certificate during the extended period in terms of Clause 6.5 of the Policy dated 29.09.2014, the impugned orders passed by the authorities terminating his services is unsustainable. He has prayed for quashment of the impugned order.
6. Per contra, State counsel has vehemently opposed the contentions and has supported the impugned order stating therein that the petitioner could not pass the CPCT examination. Vide impugned order dated 31.03.2021, the petitioner was also granted opportunities to apprise the department whether he has obtained the CPCT certificate during the period of three years i.e. from 10.08.2018 to 09.08.2021. During the aforesaid period, CPCT examination used to be conducted many a times, but the petitioner had not made any attempt to appear in the examination and clear the same. As the petitioner could not obtain the CPCT certificate, therefore, the order impugned was passed terminating the services of the petitioner. The Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANINDYA SUNDAR MUKHOPADHYAY Signing time: 10-09-2025 18:26:20 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:42861 4 WP-8136-2022 authorities have rightly considered the aspects of the matter and have passed the impugned order, therefore, no relief can be extended to the petitioner owing to non-submission of the CPCT certificate. He has prayed for dismissal of the petition.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
8. From the perusal of the record, it is seen that the petitioner's services were terminated vide order dated 31.03.2022 only on the ground that he could not obtain CPCT certificate within the stipulated time frame. As per the appointment order dated 10.08.2018, the petitioner was required to pass the CPCT test within a period of three years. The petitioner's appointment is governed under the policy of the State Government dated 29.09.2014 (Annexure P-2). Clause 6.5 of the said policy provides that a person appointed on compassionate basis is required to obtain CPCT certificate within a period of three years from the date of his appointment and the said period can be extended by a further period of one year. Thus, the petitioner was required to pass the CPCT test within a period of four years. It is pointed out that the petitioner was appointed vide order dated 10.08.2018 and the period of four years was expired on 10.08.2022 and the petitioner has already obtained the CPCT certificate in the month of July, 2022 that is within the stipulate period of four years, even, the petitioner has also obtained Diploma in Computer Application (DCA), which goes to show that the petitioner has fulfilled the criteria and is qualified to continue on the post of Assistant Grade-III. Under these circumstances, in view of the fact that the petitioner has already obtained a CPCT certificate during the extended period in term Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANINDYA SUNDAR MUKHOPADHYAY Signing time: 10-09-2025 18:26:20 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:42861 5 WP-8136-2022 of Clause 6.5 of the Policy dated 29.09.2014, the impugned order dated 31.03.2022 passed by the respondent No.2 terminating his services is unsustainable. It is hereby quashed. The authorities are directed to permit the petitioner to continue on the post in question, if there is no other legal impediment.
9. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off. No order as to costs.
(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE AM Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANINDYA SUNDAR MUKHOPADHYAY Signing time: 10-09-2025 18:26:20