Public Interest Litigation must aim to redress genuine public harm without personal gain, and improper motives may lead to dismissal.

on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

10.04

.2024

1. Heard Mr. Siddharth Rathod, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for respondent No.1/State.

2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:

• “10.1 This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire records of the case for its kind perusal in the ends of justice.

10.2 This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to declare that the impugned appointment order (Annexure P/1) passed in favour of the respondent No.4 by the respondent authorities is arbitrary, illegal and non est in the eyes of law, resultantly all the consequential service benefits rendered to the respondent No.4 is arbitrary and illegal and thus the impugned appointment order be directed to be set aside.

10.3 This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct respondent authorities to properly enquire into the matter pertaining to the appointment of the respondent No.4 and to take appropriate penal action against respondent No.4 in accordance with law.

10.4 Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner.

10.5 Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the ends of justice, equity and good conscience shall be granted to petitioner.”

3. The facts of the case are that, the respondent No.4 herein who is rendering his duties and presently posted as Engineer-in-Chief in the office of respondent authorities, was born at Tumsar, District Bhandara (Maharashtra) and was declared as Schedule Caste in the State of Maharashtra. In the year 1992 the post of Assistant Engineer was advertised for which respondent No.3 has conducted the recruitment process, in which many candidates have participated including the respondent No.4 as a Schedule Caste Candidate and after completion of the said recruitment process, on 24.08.1994 total 7 candidates were selected for being appointed for the said post on probation period for 2 years at the respective places, however, a perusal of the said select list nowhere reflect the name of the respondent No.4, which means the respondent No.4 was not selected in the said recruitment process and thus, does not fall within the zone of consideration for appointment of the said post. Resultantly by any stretch of imagination respondent No.4 should not be considered for appointment on the said post. In order to further demonstrate the impugned appointment order is passed with ill- will, malafide intention and oblique motive to extend undue advantage to the respondent No.4 in most arbitrary and illegal manner. It is pertinent to mention here that after issuance of the selection list dated 24.08.1994, on 29.03.2024 the M.P. Public Service Commission/respondent No.3 has issued a letter to one of the selected candidate namely Shri Ramsagar, stating that there is probability of change of merit list, as one post of Schedule Tribe is withheld and inspite of withholding one post which is reserved for the candidate belonging to the Schedule Tribe, does not bring the respondent No.4 within the zone of consideration as respondent No.4 applied as a Schedule Caste Candidate, as a result of which the respondent No.4 does not get any right to be appointed for the said sanctioned post of the Assistant Engineer. Thus, appointed respondent No.4 who was not even within the zone of consideration to the said post vide impugned order (Annexure P/1). The respondent No.4 being the resident of State of Maharashtra and member of Schedule Caste in the State of Maharashtra, has applied for the said post as a Schedule Caste Candidate in the State of erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh and was considered as Schedule