AYSHA NAZ Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner has challenged the order Annexure P/6 dated 05.12.2012 and consequential order Annexure P/7 of the same date.

(2.) SHRI Arun Dudawat, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not pressing his relief against the order dated 29.09.2012 (Annexure P/2). At this stage, Shri Sanjay Bahirani submits that if Annexure P/2 is not challenged he has no grievance.

(3.) PER Contra, Shri D.P.Singh, Advocate and Smt. Nidhi Patankar, Govt. Advocate supported the impugned order. Shri D. P. Singh submits that infact the order Annexure P/2 was not executed. He submits that as per the judgment of Supreme Court reported in (1998) 3 SCC 303 (State of U.P. and others Vs. Ashok Kumar Saxena and another) it is held that executed order can also be cancelled by Administration. In this regard, he also relied on WP No. 398/2002 ( Ram Prakash Singh Jadon Vs. State of M.P. and others)