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.

Arvind Mali Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Arvind Mali vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Jul 24, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1049901

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

Arvind Mali

Advocate Shri. Devendra Gangrade

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

.....petitions have been disposed of with a direction to the authorities to consider the representation and, therefore, similar orders may be passed in this petition also. having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and in view of the orders passed by this court in w.p.nos.17684/12 and 12480/2013, keeping the concept of parity in mind, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner files a representation along with a copy of w.p.no.4929/2013 arvind mali vs. state of m.p. & ors.2 the order passed today and a copy of the petition before the concerned authority within 15 days from today, the same shall be considered and decided by the authority by passing a reasoned order expeditiously, in accordance with law, preferably within a period of six weeks thereafter. it is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and therefore the authorities would be at liberty to examine the matter keeping all facts and facets into consideration and thereafter either accept or reject the claim of the petitioner by passing a reasoned order. with the aforesaid direction, the petition, filed by the petitioner, stands disposed of. c.c as per rules. ( r.s.jha ) judge mms/-

Full Judgment

W.P.No.4929/2013 Arvind Mali vs. State of M.P. & ORS.1 24.07.2013 Heard Shri Devendra Gangrade, learned counsel for the petitioner, on the question of admission and interim relief.

The petitioner has filed this petition alleging that he possesses all the necessary and requisite qualifications as prescribed by the advertisement and the rules and have qualified in the eligibility examination for appointment on the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III but he has not been called for counselling.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the act of the respondents is illegal as the petitioner is fully qualified and is entitled to be called for counselling.

It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that similar and identical petitions have been disposed of with a direction to the authorities to consider the representation and, therefore, similar orders may be passed in this petition also.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and in view of the orders passed by this court in W.P.Nos.17684/12 and 12480/2013, keeping the concept of parity in mind, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner files a representation along with a copy of W.P.No.4929/2013 Arvind Mali vs. State of M.P. & ORS.2 the order passed today and a copy of the petition before the concerned authority within 15 days from today, the same shall be considered and decided by the authority by passing a reasoned order expeditiously, in accordance with law, preferably within a period of six weeks thereafter.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and therefore the authorities would be at liberty to examine the matter keeping all facts and facets into consideration and thereafter either accept or reject the claim of the petitioner by passing a reasoned order.

With the aforesaid direction, the petition, filed by the petitioner, stands disposed of.

C.C as per rules.

( R.S.JHA ) JUDGE mms/-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial