DR. MAULSHREE AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Office has raised the objection relating to territorial jurisdiction of the Indore Bench. Counsel for the petitioner argued that the present petition was filed at Indore Bench because identical petition i.e. Writ Petition No.3499/2026 has already been entertained by this Court and the notices have been issued and interim relief is passed.

(2.) Counsel for the respondent / State argued that the same cannot be a ground for entertaining a petition beyond the territorial jurisdiction.

(3.) After hearing learned counsel for the parties, instead of deciding the question of territorial jurisdiction at this stage, we entertain the petition because identical petition has already been entertained by this Court and also considering the dates of the registration and counselling. The question of territorial jurisdiction shall remain open.