VINOD JATAV Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that issue involved in the present petition has already been decided by this Court in the case of Dr. Narendra Kumar Jain Vs. State of M.P. (W.P.No 20256/2025).

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the selection list and joining order dtd. 4/2/2025 whereby the name of petitioner has been excluded from selection. The case of the petitioner is that he had participated in the entrance examination of Rural Agricultural Extension Officer (Class-III) advertised on 06/04/2023, and as per the final result, his name appears at Sr. No.56 of waiting list dtd. 02/02/2024 against the EWS Open category. The petitioner's grievance is that after the final results were declared, many candidates, who were selected, did not join, as a result of which, various vacancies have arisen, however, the respondents, instead of following the Rule No.11.2 and 11.3 of Madhya Pradesh Kanishtha Seva (Sanyukta Aharta) Pariksha Niyam, 2013, have selected only UR category persons against the vacancies on account of non-joining of the UR category persons.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to Rule 11.2 and 11.3 of the aforesaid Rules of 2013, which provides that any candidate belonging to the reserved category is selected in the unreserved category, in that case, his/her candidature shall be considered only under the unreserved category, and shall not be considered towards reserved category, whereas, Rule 11.3 provides that a person belonging to reserved category shall be adjusted towards the unreserved category, if it is found that otherwise he/she has secured the same marks as that of the unreserved category candidate. Counsel has submitted that the respondents have adopted a procedure that those vacancies left by the unreserved category are being filled by the unreserved category only instead of all the categories, and thus, it is submitted that the respondents may be directed to follow the proper procedure.