RITA GUPTA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant and respondent No.5 applied to the post of Guruji before respondent No.4. The petitioner was appointed in the year 2002. The appointment was challenged by the respondent and the appointment was set aside in the same year itself. Thereafter, the petitioner challenged the same before the Commissioner. The Commissioner allowed the appeal and set aside the order of termination. The respondent filed W.P. No.6383 of 2007. By the order dtd. 13/4/2015, the matter was remanded to the Collector for a fresh consideration. Thereafter, the Collector passed an order upholding the order of termination. The same was challenged before the Commissioner who dismissed the appeal, Hence, the instant writ petition.

(2.) The learned Single Judge who considered the plea of the parties, dismissed the writ petition. The learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that the petitioner was less meritorious than the respondent. The appointment order was bad in law. Questioning the same, the instant appeal is filed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the order passed by the learned Single Judge as well as the other authorities are bad in law and liable to be set aside. That the petitioner was appointed as Samvidha Shala Shikshak Grade-III by the order dtd. 4/7/2015. That order has not been challenged and hence, she deserves to be continued on the said post.