Pleading are complete. Learned counsel for the

-2-

parties are ready to argue the matter finally and it is

accordingly finally heard.

Both the petitions are interconnected and

decision in one petition would directly affect the decision

of another petition, therefore, both the petitions are heard

analogously. For the purpose of convenience, the facts of

W.P. No.15147/2019 are being taken up.

2.

This petition is filed under Article 226 and 227

of the Constitution of India asking following relief:-

“(i)

That the impugned order dated 19.07.2019

(Annexure P-6) passed by the Chief Executive

Officer/Dean of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose

Medical College, Jabalpur be quashed.

(ii)

That the Respondent authority be directed to

restore the final merit list issued on

02.07.2019.

(iii)

That the Respondent authority be directed to

issue appointment order in favour of the

petitioner for the post of Assistant Grade-3.

(iv)

Any other relief which the Hon’ble Court

deems fit in the interest of justice may kindly

be granted.”

3.

The order dated 19.07.2019 (Annexure-P/6) is

a final merit list cancelling earlier merit list dated

02.07.2019, therefore, same is being challenged asking

its quashing.

4.

The facts of the case in a nutshell are that the

Medical Education Department and the Commissioner,

Medical Education issued an advertisement inviting

applications for filling up various sanctioned posts in the

Super Specialty Hospital. The advertisement is

Annexure-P/2 dated 15.11.2018 showing various posts

for which selection was to be made and applications were

invited. As per the said advertisement, there were 9 posts

-3-

of Assistant Grade-3, out of which, 5 posts (one female)

for unreserved category and remaining 4 posts were for

reserved category i.e. 1 for SC, 2 for ST and 1 for OBC.

The petitioner applied for the post of Assistant Grade-3

having all requisite qualifications in his credit. After

receiving applications of intending candidates, a

provisional merit list was published inviting objections.

The provisional merit list is Annexure-P/3. In the said

merit list, the petitioner secured 5^th rank. After considering

the objections, final merit list was published. The position

as secured by the candidates for the post of Assistant

Grade-3 in the provisional list, remained same in final

merit list. On the date of verification of the documents, the

candidates secured 1^st and 2^nd position, namely, Raja

Babju Snehi and Rupal Verma remained absent and,

therefore, the petitioner should have been appointed as

he secured 3^rd position. But, the respondents issued an

amended merit list, in which, the petitioner was placed at

serial No.6 adding two new candidates, namely, Madhur

Jain and Dharmendra Shukla. According to the petitioner,

the names of two candidates were included in the final

merit list and, therefore, Annexure-P/6 amended merit list,

said to be illegal and representation in this regard

Annexure-P/7 has been filed by the petitioner.

5.

The respondents have filed reply stating therein

that after considering the objections and also at the time

of verification of documents, it is noticed that some of the

candidates were eligible to get some additional marks,

but the same were not granted to them and accordingly

the Committee considering the said fact, awarded

additional marks and prepared the amended final merit

-4-

list i.e. Annexure-R/6, in which, the name of petitioner,

namely, Sachin Pathak is shown at serial No.6. Madhur

Jain securing maximum marks placed at serial No.1,

Rupal Verma at serial No.2, Poonam Sahu at serial No.3,

Dharmendra Shukla at serial No.4, Deepak Thakur at

serial No.5 and Sachin Pathak (present petitioner) at

serial No.6.

6.

The counsel for the petitioner filed rejoinder

and also an application for taking documents on record

mentioning therein that out of those 6 candidates shown

in the final merit list, Rupal Verma, Dharmendra Shukla

and Deepak Thakur have joined elsewhere and not

interested to