IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ROHIT ARYA ON THE 17th OF JANUARY, 2023 WRIT PETITION No. 9029 of 2012 BETWEEN:- DHYANENDRA SINGH JADON S/O SHRI YOGENDRA SINGH JADON, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCCUPATION: UNEMPLOYED, R/O GRAM KATHON, TEH. VIJAYPUR, SHEOPUR (MADHYA PRADESH) .....PETITIONER (BY SHRI UDIT SAXENA-ADVOCATE ) AND 1. THE STATE OF M.P. THROUGH THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH) 2. THE COLLECTOR-CUM DISTRICT PROGRAME COORDINATOR, NATIONAL GRAMIN ROJGAR GUARANTEE SCHEME, DISTRICT SHEOPUR (MADHYA PRADESH) 3. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER-CUM- PROGRAME OFFICER, NATIONAL GRAMIN ROJGAR GUARANTEE SCHEME JANPAD PANCHAYAT, VIJAYPUR, DISTRICT SHEOPUR (MADHYA PRADESH) 4. MAHESH KUSHWAH S/O SHRI RAMESH KUSHWAH OCCUPATION: SERVICE R/O HARIGAWA POST-KATHON TEH.VIJAYPUR, SHEOPUR, DISTRICT SHEOPUR (MADHYA PRADESH) .....RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI SHIRAZ QURRESHI-GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTS/STATE) (BY SHRI SAURABH BHELSEWALE-ADVOCATE FOR INTERVENOR) This petition coming on for order this day, th e court passed the 1 (ROHIT ARYA) JUDGE following: ORDER This Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India is directed against the appointment of respondent No.4-Mahesh Kushwah on the post of Gram Rozgar Sahayak in the year 2010. It appears that petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the respondents for not granting him the benefit of 20 marks for PGDCA diploma, as according to petitioner he holds certificate thereupon. This Court on 20/12/2012 had passed interim order staying the operation of impugned order dated 27/10/2010 (Annexure P-2) granting appointment to respondent No.4-Mahesh Kushwah & order dated 17/07/2012 (Annexure P-10) denying the benefit of 20 marks to petitioner as against PGDCA Diploma. It further appears that during pendency of this Writ Petition, one Smt. Hemlata Jadon has been appointed as Gram Rozgar Sahayak and is working on the said post. It is more than 10 years, the Writ Petition is pending consideration whereas a new incumbent has already been appointed in 2017 and therefore, in the opinion of this Court, no useful purpose shall be sub-served addressing on the question raised in this Writ Petition at this distance of time. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition stands dismissed. However, petitioner is set at liberty to apply afresh, in the event, there is vacancy duly notified through the advertisement. (Dubey) 2 SUNEEL DUBEY 2023.01.18 13:29:10 -08'00'