IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK &

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA WRIT APPEAL NO. 450 of 2026 MAHENDRA SINGH BATHAM Vs.

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

&

WRIT APPEAL NO. 456 of 2026 HEMANT BATHAM Vs.

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APPEARANCE:

Shri Yash Sharma – Advocate for the appellant in W.A.No.450/2026 and Shri Anand Bhardwaj – Advocate for the appellant in W.A.No.456/2026.

Shri Vivek Khedkar – Additional Advocate General for the respondents/State.

JUDGMENT

(Delivered on 26 ^th the day of February, 2026)

Per: Justice Anand Pathak

1. Regard being had to similitude of the dispute and since common question is involved in both the writ appeals, therefore, they are being heard analogously and decided by this common judgment. For factual clarity, facts of Writ Appeal No.450/2026 are taken into consideration.

2. The present writ appeal (Writ Appeal No.450/2026) under Section 2 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 is preferred by the appellant being crestfallen by the order dated 28-01-2026 passed by learned Single Judge in writ petition No.30183/2025 (although wrongly the order passed in W.P.No.30444/2025 is filed) whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner)

has been dismissed.

3. Matter pertains to validity/invalidity of caste certificate. The SDO, Gwalior issued a caste certificate, certifying that petitioner belongs to Manjhi caste (Scheduled Tribe). On the strength of that caste certificate, petitioner was appointed as Pharmacist Grade -II in Public Health and Family Welfare Department at Shivpuri vide order dated 16-03-2016 against a vacancy reserved for the Scheduled Tribe category. In the appointment process, all educational testimonials as well as the caste certificate of the petitioner were allegedly verified by the competent authorities. However, on the basis of complaint made by one Gaurishankar Rajput, matter was enquired into and FIR at crime No.07/2025 for offence under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC was registered against the petitioner and thereafter vide notice dated 15-07-2025 petitioner was asked to produce all the documents having material bearing in the matter. From time to time, General Administration Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh issued instructions governing the verification of social status of candidates belonging to the Manjhi community. Registration of aforesaid FIR was called in question by the petitioner before learned Writ Court but the same was dismissed, therefore, the present appeal.

4. It is the submission of learned counsel for petitioner that matter involves validity of the caste certificate of the petitioner. According to counsel for the petitioner, it is well settled law, after the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Madhuri Patil Vs. Addl.

Commissioner, reported in AIR 1995 SC 94 that all the disputes in relation to caste certificates, will be the domain of High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee. Therefore, if respondents have any doubt in relation to petitioner belonging to Manjhi caste, then they should refer the matter to the Caste Scrutiny Committee. It is further submitted that earlier petitioner preferred writ petition bearing No.13536/2024 challenging the orders of respondents dated 26-02- 2024 and 28-02-2024 by which petitioner was stopped to discharge his duties. Said writ petition was allowed, setting aside both the orders and direction was given to the respondents to permit the petitioner to discharge his duties. Another writ petition bearing No.254/2025 was also preferred by the petitioner seeking the relief that his matter be referred to the Caste Scrutiny Committee for its decision, which was allowed but still petitioner is facing the wrath of criminal prosecution.

5. When learned counsel for the petitioner further