IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT INDORE

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE JAI KUMAR PILLAI

WRIT PETITION No.10277 of 2021

ANUSUIYA PRAJAPATI

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHER

WITH

WRIT PETITION No. 18396 of 2022

SMT. SARITA MEHRA

Versus

DEPARTMENT OF TRIBAL AFFAIRS AND OTHERS

WRIT PETITION No. 19690 of 2022

SMT. RENU MEWATI

Versus

TRIBAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS

WRIT PETITION No. 19986 of 2022 SMT. VIJETA SHRIVASTAVA Versus DEPARTMENT OF TRIBAL AFFAIRS AND OTHERS WRIT PETITION No. 20187 of 2022 SMT. ARPITA KATTHA Versus DEPARTMENT OF TRIBAL AFFAIRS AND OTHERS WRIT PETITION No. 4358 of 2023 MRS. KAVITA DEVDA Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND OTHERS _________________________________________________________

Appearance:

Shri L.C. Patne - Advocate for the petitioners.

Shri Anirudh Mapani – Government Advocate for respondents/State ______________________________________________________________

Reserved on : 08/12/2025 Post on : 12/01/2026 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

O R D E R

These writ petitions arising out of various impugned orders passed by the respondent Authorities cancelling the candidatureship of the petitioners in different selection processes for appointment to the post of Uchha Madhyamik Shikshak (different streams).

2. Since common questions of facts and law are involved, all the petitions have been heard analogously and are being decided by this common order.

3. It is the case of the petitioners that they are residing within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Prior to marriage, the concerned petitioners were residing in another State and belongs to a reserved class community, for which a valid Other Backward Class (OBC) certificate / SC / ST Caste certificate was issued by the Competent Authority of that State.

4. It is further the case of the petitioners that upon marriage with a permanent resident of the State of Madhya Pradesh, the petitioners shifted her residence and was issued a domicile certificate of the State in accordance with the prevailing Government policy and circulars. After acquiring domicile status, the petitioners claim entitlement to all statutory and constitutional benefits available to members of the said reserved class in the State.

5. It is also the case of the petitioners that the petitioners possess the requisite educational qualifications prescribed under the applicable Recruitment Rules governing the teaching cadre. The Rules, framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, provide for reservation for women candidates and prescribe postgraduation and professional teaching qualifications as essential eligibility criteria.

6. It is further the case of the petitioners that pursuant to an advertisement issued by the Competent Examining Authority, applications were invited for appointment to the post of Uchha Madhyamik Shikshak (different streams). The petitioners applied under the respective SC/ST/OBC category, participated in the selection process, qualified the written examination on merit and was accordingly called for document verification.

7. It is lastly the case of the petitioners that at the stage of document verification, the petitioner’s candidatureship was cancelled without issuance of any show-cause notice or affording an opportunity of hearing, solely on the ground of non-submission of caste certificate issued by the State of Madhya Pradesh. Resulting in denial of reservation benefits and prompting the filing of the present petition.

8. Per contra, Learned Government Advocate for the respondents/State submits that though the petitioners qualified the High School Teacher Eligibility Test-2018, they failed to produce a valid Domicile/Caste Certificate of Madhya Pradesh at the stage of document verification and had falsely declared herself as a domicile of Madhya Pradesh in the online application. The Tehsildar, after due scrutiny, rightly rejected their applications for caste certif