--- 1 --- HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE S.B.: HON'BLE MR. S. C. SHARMA, J WRIT PETITION NO. 500 / 2011 MEENA W/O RAMESH CHANDRA MALVIYA Vs. THE STATE OF MP & 3 OTHERS * * * * * O R D E R ( 23/11/2011) The petitioner before this Court has filed this present writ petition being aggrieved by the order of termination dt. 31/10/2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, has informed this court that identical writ petition has been allowed vide order dt. 7/9/10 passed in the case of an identically placed persons namely; Dayal s/o Amarsingh and others Vs. State of MP and others [WP NO. 8778 / 2009 (s)]. Learned Government Advocate has not disputed the order passed by this Court in the case of Dayal s/o Amarsingh. This Court has carefully gone through the order passed --- 2 --- in the case of Dayal s/o Amarsingh and the same reveals that a bunch of WPs were allowed by a common order dt. 7/9/10 passed in the case of Dayal s/o Amarsingh. The petitions were allowed with a liberty to issue a fresh Show Cause Notice to the petitioners therein and to pass a reasoned order. This court in the case of Dayal s/o Amarsingh (supra), in paragraphs 9 to 13 has held as under : 9. This Court while deciding the aforesaid writ petition vide order dated 6.8.08, has granted liberty to the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat to pass a fresh order after issuing a show cause notice and after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners therein. A show cause notice was issued by the respondent/s as contained in annexure P-7 and the show cause notice simply reflects that the name of petitioners were wrongly included in the merit list and some candidates have received more marks than the petitioners. Similar cyclostyle notices were issued to the other employees and a reply was filed by other identically placed employees/petitioners wherein it was stated that petitioners have been appointed by virtue of their performance and by virtue of the marks obtained by them in the examination conducted by the Professional Examination Board. An order was finally passed by the respondents on 31.10.09 and the order reflects that respondent CEO has rectified the merit list and as the reply of the petitioners was not acceptable and satisfactory, the same is rejected. 10. This Court, in order to find out, whether any candidate who has received --- 3 --- more marks than the present petitioners was left out in the process of selection in the matter of appointment to the post of Sanvida Shala Shikshak Gr. III, has directed the respondents to produce the record on 5.7.10, however, the same was not produced on 29.7.10 and once again time was granted on 29.7.10 to produce the relevant record. Mr. Vikram Singh, Sahayak Vistar Adhikari is present before this Court alongwith the record. This Court has carefully gone through the record and has not been able to find out a single example which establishes that a person who has received more marks than the petitioners has not been appointed by the Janpad Panchayat. 11. Learned GA Mr. Vivek Phadke as well as Mrs. Rashmi Pandit appearing for the respondents State have were also not able to find out a single example after going through the record in respect of the fact that a person who has received more marks in the examination has not been appointed as Sanvida Shala Shikshak Gr. III. 12. Resultantly, as not a single example from the record has been demonstrated before this Court, nor the record contains any list wherein it is reflected that person having more marks was ignored and person with less marks has been appointed,the impugned order deserves to be quashed and is hereby quashed and the petitioners, as they are continuing in services by virtue of interim order dated 30.11.09shall be entitled to continue in service. 13. However, as per submissions advanced by learned GA, a liberty is granted to the respondent to issue a fresh show cause notice to the petitioners and after receiving their reply, the respondents shall pass a reasoned order. The show cause notice shall contain the details of persons who have obtained more marks than the petitioners and who were not appointed on the post of Sanvida Shala Shikshak Gr.III. --- 4 --- The petitioners shall be given an opportunity of filing a reply of the show cause notice and after receiving the reply, the respondent shall pass a speaking order furnishing all minute details duly supported with the record in the matter. Resultantly, as the petitioner is identically placed person, the writ petition is allowed and the directions issued by this court in the case of Dayal s/o Amarsingh shall be applicable mutatis mutandis, in the present case also. (S. C. SHARMA) J U D G E KR