Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 740 (MP)

Santosh Kumar Tiwari v. State of M. P.

2020-07-28

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY

body2020
ORDER 1. The petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India claiming following reliefs:- “i. That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to place the petitioner in the category reserved for PH in High School Teacher Eligibility Test, 2018 examination and to include him in the merit list for Ph category for counselling, selection and appointment process for the post of High School Teacher English Grade I. ii. That any other writ or writs order or order, direction or direction thought just and proper may kindly be issued.” 2. The respondent Department had conducted the High School Teacher Eligibility Test, 2018 through VYAPAM. The petitioner applied and faced the said examination. An admit card was issued vide Annexure P/4 for the examination to be held on 3.2.2019. For some reasons, the examination was again rescheduled for 29.9.2019 for which another admit card was issued. The petitioner appeared in the examination and passed the same with 79.05 marks. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of an accident, the petitioner was operated upon in his ears in the month of January, 2016. The discharge certificate was issued which is Annexure P/7. Due to the said accident, the petitioner has sustained physical disability, but PH (Physical Handicapped) certificate to that effect could not be issued to him before the date of examination. Now the requisite certificates (Annexure P/8 and P/9) have been issued by the Medical Board in the month of February, 2020. It was claimed that since after declaration of result of the examination, no counselling has taken place due to COVID-19 pandemic, the petitioner has filed a representation dated 20.2.2020 (Annexure P/10) with a request to include his name in the merit list for PH category, but no heed has been paid. Learned counsel prayed that in view of the physical disability, the petitioner is entitled for placement in the said category, hence the petition be allowed. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusing the material on record, it is observed that admittedly the petitioner had appeared in the said examination under unreserved category. Even the certificate of PH category was submitted after the last date of the examination as prescribed. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner had applied under the PH category. Even the certificate of PH category was submitted after the last date of the examination as prescribed. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner had applied under the PH category. There is no material to point out that inter-changing the category after filing the application and examination is over is permissible. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the petition. The same is dismissed.