Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 94 (MP)

Abhinav Mendhe v. State of M. P.

2019-01-29

R.S.JHA, SANJAY DWIVEDI

body2019
ORDER : Shri Aditya Sanghi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Piyush Dharmadhikari, learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State. Shri Anoop Nair, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3. 2. Heard. 3. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the denial of admission to the petitioner in the Private Medical College in the State of Madhya Pradesh on the ground that the petitioner, who has sought admission in the reserved category Scheduled Caste, does not possess the necessary certificate in that regard from the authority to the State of Madhya Pradesh. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner belongs to the Mahar caste which is a Scheduled Caste notified for the State of Maharashtra as well as for the State of Madhya Pradesh. It is submitted that though the petitioner's family originally belongs to the State of Maharashtra the petitioner was born in Madhya Pradesh, therefore, in accordance with law he has produced the caste certificate from the authority of Maharashtra but the respondent/authorities have denied admission on the ground that the petitioner does not belong to the Scheduled Caste category in the State of Madhya Pradesh. It is submitted that the petitioner has obtained the necessary certificate from the competent authority and as the Mahar caste is also notified as a Scheduled Caste category in the State of Madhya Pradesh, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to get admission in the reserved category seat in the State of Madhya Pradesh and cannot be denied the same only on account of the fact that the petitioner's family originally belongs to Maharashtra and that the petitioner has obtained the caste certificate from the authorities at Maharashtra. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is observed that the issue raised by the petitioner is squarely covered by the decisions of the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Action Committee on Issue of Caste Certificates to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the State of Maharashtra and another vs. Union of India and another, (1994) 5 SCC 244 as well as in the case of Bir Singh vs. Delhi Jal Board and others, (Civil Appeal No. 1085/2013) reported in 2018 SCC Online SC 1241, which are against the petitioner and, therefore, we do not find any merit in the petition. 6. The petition, filed by the petitioner, being meritless is, accordingly, dismissed. Petition dismissed.