Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Jitendra Kumar Gautam Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Jitendra Kumar Gautam vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Nov 23, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1039621

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jitendra Kumar Gautam

Advocate Shri. Ajeet Singh

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

jitendra kumar gautam versus state of m.p.& ors.writ petition no.19662 ”23. 11.2012: shri ajeet singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. petitioner has been selected and empaneled for appointment as gram rojgar sahayak, name of petitioner appears in select list annexure p-1. it seems that initially when appointments on the post of gram rojgar sahayak were being made one smt. ragini sharma challenged the selection process by approaching this court in w.p.no.8101/2012. during the pendency of the said writ petition certain development took place, which resulted in appointment of present petitioner, due to aforesaid development the writ petition w.p.no.8101/2012(s) filed by smt. ragini sharma has been dismissed by this court on 6.11.2012. however, on the ground that w.p.no.8101/2012 is still pending, it seems that further proceedings for appointment is being stayed only because the writ petition w.p.no.8101/2012 was pending and, therefore, petitioner is before this court. the order annexure p-2 passed by the chief executive officer, zila panchayat stana indicates that only because the writ petition w.p.no.8101/2012 (s) is pending he is not proceeding in the matter. however, as the said writ petition is already dismissed, as indicated hereinabove, on 6.11.2012 the chief executive officer of the zila panchayat satna is directed to proceed in the matter of appointment of gram rojgar sahayak as per selection indicated in the select list in accordance to law and finalize the same at an earlier date. action be taken and decision communicated to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. with the aforesaid the petition stands disposed of. (rajendra menon) judge ss/-

Full Judgment

Jitendra Kumar Gautam versus State of M.P.& ORS.Writ Petition No.19662 ”

23. 11.2012: Shri Ajeet Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Petitioner has been selected and empaneled for appointment as Gram Rojgar Sahayak, name of petitioner appears in select list Annexure P-1.

It seems that initially when appointments on the post of Gram Rojgar Sahayak were being made one Smt.

Ragini Sharma challenged the selection process by approaching this Court in W.P.No.8101/2012.

During the pendency of the said writ petition certain development took place, which resulted in appointment of present petitioner, due to aforesaid development the writ petition W.P.No.8101/2012(s) filed by Smt.

Ragini Sharma has been dismissed by this Court on 6.11.2012.

However, on the ground that W.P.No.8101/2012 is still pending, it seems that further proceedings for appointment is being stayed only because the writ petition W.P.NO.8101/2012 was pending and, therefore, petitioner is before this Court.

The order Annexure P-2 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Stana indicates that only because the writ petition W.P.NO.8101/2012 (s) is pending he is not proceeding in the matter.

However, as the said writ petition is already dismissed, as indicated hereinabove, on 6.11.2012 the Chief Executive Officer of the Zila Panchayat Satna is directed to proceed in the matter of appointment of Gram Rojgar Sahayak as per selection indicated in the select list in accordance to law and finalize the same at an earlier date.

Action be taken and decision communicated to the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

With the aforesaid the petition stands disposed of.

(Rajendra Menon) Judge ss/-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial