Madhya Pradesh High Court
WP/12264/2020 of DINESH BRAMHANE Vs HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT I N D O R E BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT INDOREBEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMAON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 12264 of 2020
BETWEEN:-
DINESHBRAMHANES/OCHHAGANBRAMHANE, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,BRAMHANE, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,1.OCCUPATION: NIL VILLAGE ALKHAD POSTBANDHARA BUJURGTEH.PANSEMAL(MADHYA PRADESH)BANDHARA BUJURGTEH.PANSEMAL(MADHYA PRADESH)
GUMANSINGH MUJALDE S/O GAMBHIRSINGH,AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NILAGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NIL2.VILLAGE PIPRIYA PANI TEHSIL KUKSHI(MADHYA PRADESH)VILLAGE PIPRIYA PANI TEHSIL KUKSHI(MADHYA PRADESH)
LAKHANLAL S/O KISHORE GANGLE, AGEDABOUT 35 YEARS, OCCUPATION: CONTRACT3.SERVICE 11SANT NAGAR UJJAIN (MADHYAPRADESH)
MAHESH PAWAR S/O VITTHAL PAWAR, AGEDABOUT 34 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NIL GRAMABOUT 34 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NIL GRAM4.MAGRIYA POST BADGAV TEHSIL GOGAVA(MADHYA PRADESH)MAGRIYA POST BADGAV TEHSIL GOGAVA(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SHRI AKASH SHARMA - ADVOCATE)
AND
HIGHEREDUCATIONDEPARTMENT1.PRINCIPAL SECRETARY SATPUDA BHAWANBHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)COMMISSIONERHIGHEREDUCATIONBHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)COMMISSIONERHIGHEREDUCATION2.DEPARTMENT SATPURA BHAWAN BHOPAL(MADHYA PRADESH)(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI ANENDRA SINGH PARIHAR – PANEL LAWYER)
This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
1. By this petition the petitioners have prayed for the followingreliefs :- “(1)To, allow the writ petition by quashing theimpugned notification dated 30.06.2020 (Ann. P/2) issuedby the respondent No.2.
(2) To, quash the impugned schedule dated 17.12.2019(Ann. P/3) issued by the respondents No.2.
(3) To direct the respondents to allow the petitioner toparticipate in the selection process for the appointment ofguest faculty in pursuance to schedule dated 30.06.2020.
(4) To, direct the respondent no.2 to open the link on the portal of higher education to the petitioner or permit the petitioner to apply manually for the academic sessionof 2020-2021.of 2020-2021.
(5) To issue an appropriate writ, direction or order, asthis Hon'ble court things fit & proper seeing the facts andcircumstances of the case.”this Hon'ble court things fit & proper seeing the facts andcircumstances of the case.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitionersmay be permitted to submit a fresh application before the respondentswho may be directed to determine whether the petitioners are fulfillingthe eligibility criteria in terms of the U.G.C. Norms. If they are found tobe fulfilling the eligibility criteria then they may be considered forappointment to the post of guest faculty in question and in case they arenot fulfilling the eligibility criteria they may not be considered.Reliance has been placed on the decision of Division Bench of thisCourt at Principal Seat, Jabalpur in W.P. No.17228/2023 (Dr. Sachin and Others V/s. State of M.P. and Others) decided on 31.07.2023and the order dated 26.04.2022 passed in W.P. No.6159/2022(Pradeep Kumar Yadav V/s. State of M.P. & Others).
3. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that in casesuch an application is filed by the petitioners then the same shall beconsidered in accordance with law.
4. Thus in view of the aforesaid, it is directed that in case thepetitioners make an application before the respondents in respect of thegrievances as raised by them in this petition, then the said applicationshall be considered and decided by the Commissioner, Department ofHigher Education, Bhopal, respondent No.2 in accordance with law andby taking into consideration the judgments rendered in the case of Dr.Sachin & Others (supra) and Pradeep Kumar Yadav (supra). Thesaid decision be taken within a period of three months from the date offiling of the application by the petitioners.
5. With the aforesaid, without expressing any opinion on merits, thepetition stands disposed off.
ns
(PRANAY VERMA)
JUDGE