SITA PRAJAPATI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the selection of the respondent No.5 on the post of Peon in the Establishment of District and Sessions Judge, Panna.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that the the petitioner was more meritorious and her name was also mentioned at serial number one of the list forwarded by the District Establishment to the High Court, but the authorities instead of issuing an appointment order in favour of the petitioner, have appointed the respondent No.5 on the post of Peon thereby committing an illegality. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner having been selected and being more meritorious, is entitled to be appointed on the post of Peon and denial of the same, to the petitioner, amounts to violating her fundamental rights enshrined under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is observed that the list that was forwarded by the District Establishment was duly considered by the High Court and while doing so, the High Court found that the post in question was reserved for a general category women candidate and that the petitioner belongs to a reserved category candidate but was wrongly included in the list of general category women candidates ignoring the fact that reservation for women is a horizontal reservation, and in such circumstances, the seat could have been filled up only by a general category women candidate.