IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ASHISH SHROTI WRIT PETITION No. 6455 of 2022 GAURISHANKAR RAJPUT Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Mr. Vineet - Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. M.P.S. Raghuvanshi - Senior Advocate with Mr. Dharmendra Singh Raghuvanshi - Advocate for respondents no.13, 17 & 18.

Mr. K.K. Prajapati - GA for the State.

Mr. Madhukar Kulshrestha - Advocate for respondent no.19.

ORDER

Reserved on : 27.01.2026 Delivered on : 23.02.2026

ORDER

The petitioner seeks issuance of a writ of quo-warranto in relation to the appointment of respondent no.8 to 19, who have been appointed to the post of Constable under the SC/ST category. It is alleged in the writ petition that the caste certificates on the basis of which the respondents have secured employment are forged and fabricated.

2. The petitioner claims himself to be a social worker and an RTI activist. He has obtained certain documents under Right to Information Act, 2005, in relation to the caste certificates of respondent no.8 to 19. As per his submission, the caste certificates have not been found registered in the office of the concerned Sub-

Divisional Officer. He thus submits that the appointment of respondent no.8 to 19 on the post of Constable is invalid and they have no authority to hold the post. The petitioner has also prayed for a direction to respondent no.1 & 2 to take cognizance of the matter and, after making a suitable inquiry, take necessary action.

3. Even though the petition is pending since 2022, the respondents have chosen not to file reply so far.

4. Respondent No.8, 13, 17 & 18 have filed I.A. No.3904/2022, seeking dismissal of the writ petition on account of suppression of material facts. It is alleged in the application that the petitioner had earlier filed a public interest litigation being W.P. No.4065 of 2021 seeking inquiry into the appointment of persons who have secured appointment on the basis of forged and fabricated caste certificates. It is alleged that respondent no.14 & 15 of this writ petition were also named in the earlier writ petition. The said petition was disposed of vide order dated 8.12.2021, Annexure R/2, giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority against individual persons. It is further alleged in the application that the petitioner has suppressed the filing of the earlier writ petition in para 2 of this petition. It is also stated in the application that, as per the liberty granted by this Court, the petitioner has not approached the competent authority. The objection with regard to the petitioner's locus to file the present writ petition has also been raised in the application. The application further avers that the petitioner is facing seven criminal cases and, therefore, at his instance, the present petition cannot be entertained.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that respondent no.8 to 19 have secured employment as reserved category candidates on the basis of caste certificates which are not found registered in the relevant register. He also referred to the documents which are obtained under the Right to Information Act to show that the caste certificates are not found registered. Learned counsel further submitted that respondent no.8 to 19 are holding the post without any authority inasmuch as they were not eligible to be appointed on the said post. In support of the submission, he placed reliance upon the Division Bench judgment in the case of Prabhat Kumar Verma Vs. State of M.P & others, in W.P. No.30758/2023 wherein this Court has issued directions to the authority for making enquiry. The learned counsel thus submitted that the appointment of respondent no.8 to 19 are liable to be quashed. Alternatively, he prayed that respondent no.1 & 2 be directed to take suitable action in the matter.

6. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent no.8, 13, 17 & 18 raised an objection with regard to maintainability of the wri