Madhya Pradesh High Court: In a petition challenging the actions of the respondent State concerning the operation of select lists for Unreserved and OBC categories where the Court issued certain directions regarding disclosure of merit rankings and appointment details, a division bench comprising of Raj Mohan Singh and Devnarayan Mishra, JJ., granted an extension for compliance with the initial order, subject to the payment of costs of Rs. 50,000 to be deposited with the M.P. High Court Legal Service Authority, Jabalpur.
In the instant matter, the petitioners filed a petition challenging the actions of the respondent State concerning the operation of select lists for Unreserved and OBC categories. On 04.04.2024, the Court issued a notice to the respondents with specific directions to file a reply within seven working days upon payment of Process Fee and stated that the non-compliance of the same would result in the dismissal of the petition. The State was directed to file a parawise reply disclosing, names and merit rankings of individuals in the unoperated select lists for Unreserved and OBC categories (each comprising 13% of advertised vacancies), merit ranking of the petitioners and whether any candidate with a lower merit ranking than the petitioners has been appointed to fill 87% of the vacancies.
The Court noted that the State did not comply with the directions issued on 04.04.2024. The Court noted that the petitioners’ counsel emphasised on the urgency of the matter and pressed for further directions. While expressing dissatisfaction with the State’s non-compliance, the Court granted a final opportunity to the respondent/State to comply, subject to a cost of Rs. 50,000/- to be deposited in the M.P. High Court Legal Service Authority, Jabalpur, by the next hearing date, 31-07-2024. The Court also directed that the State may recover the cost amount from the responsible officer who failed to comply with the order.
[Pragya Sharma v. State of M.P., 2024 SCC OnLine MP 4915, Decided on 16-07-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Anshuman Singh, Counsel for the Petitioners;
Mr. Darshan Soni, Govt. Advocate, Counsel for the Respondent/State.
