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

th

ON THE 24 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 WRIT PETITION No. 18126 of 2022 PRADEEP RAJPOOT Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Mr. Dharmendra Singh Raghuvanshi - Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Monika Mishra - GA for the State.

ORDER The petitioner has filed this writ petition praying for following reliefs : "(i) That, the respondents be directed to henceforth grant the appointment to the petitioner on the post of Constable according to the choice filled by him in the application form and the said appointment order may be issued with retrospective day i.e. the date w.e.f. 24.03.2017, the day the petitioner was appointed on the present post of Constable SAF.

(ii) That, it may also be held that the petitioner would entail with all consequential benefits including seniority, promotion etc on his newly recruited/joined post according to the direction of this Hon’ble Court.

(iii) That, other relief which is just and Proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted."

2. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset requested for disposal of this writ petition with direction to respondents to take a decision on his representation dated 28/10/2025 keeping in view the order passed by the Apex Curt in the case of Praveen Kumar Kurmi Vs. State of M.P. and Ors. (Civil Appeal No.7663/2021). He also placed before this Court, the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Manish Yadav Vs. State of M.P. & Ors., (W.P. No.20873/2022) wherein this Court has directed the respondents to consider and decide the representation.

3. There is a strong opposition by the learned counsel for the State on the ground of delay and laches on the part of petitioner. It is his submission that the selection process in question pertains to the year 2016 when the allotment of seat was made to the petitioner. He submitted that petitioner accepted the allotted seat without any objection and kept silence for about six years. There is no explanation given by the petitioner in the writ petition for inordinate delay except to say that when the order was passed in the case of Praveen Kumar Kurmi (supra), he filed the present writ petition. The learned counsel for the State submitted that showing any indulgence in favour of petitioner would disturb the rights of other incumbents, who have been allotted seat in District Police Force. Thus, in absence of any cogent explanation for the delay, no interference is warranted in the present case.

4. Considered the arguments on admission.

5. Facts necessary for decision of this case are that petitioner participated in the process of Police Constable Recruitment Test-2016. After having selected, he was appointed as Constable in 2nd Battalion SAF, Gwalior, District Gwalior. The petitioner was accordingly issued appointment order on 20.03.2017 and he accepted the same without any objection and is thus working ever since.

6. From the records, it is gathered that one Praveen Kumar Kurmi was a candidate in the recruitment process commenced in the year 2017. He was allotted posting at 18th BN, SAF, Shivpuri. However, since he was aggrieved, he approached this Court in year the 2018 itself by filing W.P. No.8807/2018. From the facts narrated in Apex Court order, it appears that an interim order was passed in the petition on 20/7/2018 pursuant to which a post was kept vacant for the petitioner therein. The petition was however ultimately not accepted and the matter ultimately travelled to Apex Court. It is gathered that before the Apex Court, the respondents made a statement that Shri Kurmi can be accommodated against the post kept vacant pursuant to interim order. The Apex Court, therefore, disposed of the civil appeal with direction to Govt. officials to grant posting to the appellant therein (Praveen Kumar Kurmi) in the District Police Force with all consequential b