SOURABH DUBEY Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners in both these cases, M.P.No.1407/92 and M.P.No.1461/92, were candidates at the Pre -Engg. Test held by the Professional Examinations Board of Madhya Pradesh under the directions of the respondent No.1 and 2 for admission of degree/diploma courses in the Engineering Colleges of the State. The petitioners in both the petitions applied under the category of sons and grand sons of freedom fighters. Both of them were not treated to be falling under the category of sons and grand sons of freedom fighters for the reason that the certificate they had produced of being son or a grandson of a freedom fighter was not in proforma 8.4 annexed to the Rules. The petitioners contend that the prescribed proforma contained the words 'legitimate' son/daughter/wife which were not used by the Collector while issuing the certificate. The Collector had omitted the word legitimate in the certificate. According to the petitioners firstly since the Collector -has to give the certificate and the form was prescribed by the respondents it was for the Collector to have given a correct certificate. Secondly, when a person is certified to be a son or grandson of freedom fighter it has to be presumed unless contrary is proved that the person is and claims to be, a legitimate son or grandson and not an illegitimate one.

(2.) DESPITE service of notice the respondents have not chosen to enter appearance and to file return. We have, therefore, to decide this case in absence of a return and in absence of representation on behalf of the respondents.