RAMESH KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the order passed by the Additional Commissioner is against the record and the ground that the petitioner is not a resident of village Kamlawada is not sustainable inasmuch as his appointment order was issued after thorough inquiry in the matter. It is also submitted that respondent no.7 is not a local resident and without looking into the fact that he is not a local bona fide resident his case has been allowed by the learned Additional Commissioner.

(3.) Learned counsel for respondent no.7, on the other hand, submits that he was very much a candidate before the Selection Committee and his application was available with Gram Sabha of Kamlawada as is apparent from a copy of resolution dated 26.01.2003 filed by present respondent no.7 as Annexure R/2. It is seen that his application was received by Gram Sabha and that Gram Sabha had forwarded all the eight applications with a note that respondent no.7 was resident of the same village; whereas other 07 applicants were residents of Panchayat Headquarters Kadwaya. This fact has not been considered by the authorities and without considering the aspect of local resident of respondent no.7, the order was issued in favour of the petitioner.