IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ASHISH SHROTI

th

ON THE 10 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 WRIT PETITION No. 20590 of 2022 SMT. VINEETA SHARMA Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Narottam Sharma- Advocate for the petitioner.

Smt. Monika Mishra- Government Advocate for the State/respondent no.1 to 3.

Shri Somnath Seth- Advocate for the respondent No.4.

ORDER Petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 28-09-2021 (Annexure P-2)

whereby Collector Bhind has accepted the complaint submitted by one Deepak Sharma and has set aside the petitioner's appointment on the post of Gram Rojgar Sahayak and has issued direction to Chief Executive Officer of Zila Panchayat, Bhind to take steps for fresh appointment. She is also aggrieved by order dated 18-08-2022 (Annexure P-1) whereby the Commissioner, Chambal Division, Morena has dismissed the petitioner's appeal.

2. Pursuant to the advertisement issued by Zila Panchayat Morena, the petitioner applied for appointment on the post of Gram Rojgar Sahayak for Gram Panchayat Mehra Bujurg, Tehsil Lahar, District Bhind. She was selected and appointed on the said post vide order dated 31-08-2013. The petitioner started working on the said post.

3. It appears that some complaint with regard to petitioner's appointment was made by one Deepak Sharma before Collector, Bhind. From the order passed by Collector, it is gathered that the complaint against her was that since she is active in local politics, she is not taking interest in Gram Panchayat work as a result of which the villagers are deprived of benefit of Govt. Schemes. It is further gathered that the issue was raised in Vidhan Sabha also. Resultantly, the file regarding petitioner's appointment was summoned by MNGREGA Council at Bhopal. The matter was inquired into. It was found that as on 01.01.2012, the petitioner's name was not included in the voter list of Gram Panchayat Mehra Bujurg. Based upon the report submitted, the Collector took up the matter. After issuing notice to the petitioner and taking her response, the Collector passed the order, dated 28- 09-2021, thereby setting aside petitioner's appointment and has directed for fresh appointment.

4. The appeal filed against the said order has also been dismissed by the Commissioner. Therefore, petitioner is before this Court challenging the orders passed by Collector and Commissioner. Both the authorities have found that on the date of submission of application for appointment, the petitioner's name was not included in the voter list of Gram Panchayat Mehera Bujurk, Tehsil Lahar, District Bhind. This Court vide order dated 18- 10-2022 stayed the effect and operation of the impugned order and consequently petitioner is working on the post in question.

5. Challenging the impugned orders, the learned counsel for petitioner argued that petitioner was married to one Ravi Sharma on 24-02-2012. She was shifted to her matrimonial home in village Mehra Bujurg. The petitioner immediately applied for including her name in voter list of Gram Panchayat in June' 2012. In the meantime, the advertisement inviting applications for appointment on the post in question was issued. She applied for appointment on 25-07-2012. Thereafter, her name was included in the voter list on 16-10-

2012.

6. Learned Counsel therefore submitted that there is sufficient material available on record to show that the petitioner was the resident of Gram Panchayat Mehra Bujurg and sticking to the condition that her name was not included in the voter list as on the date of submission of application, would be unreasonable and arbitrary. He refers to Clause 4(3) of Circular dated 02- 06-2012 to say that the requirement under the said clause is that the candidate should be the resident of concerned Gram Panchayat, and if it is otherwise established that petitioner is residing in Gram Panchayat, non-inclusion of her name in the voter list would be inconsequential. He therefore prays for setting asi