Jabalpur
The High Court has asked the Madhya Pradesh government why the Other Backward Classes are not being given the benefit of reservation in proportion to their population. The government has been instructed to submit its reply in this regard.
Advocate Union for Democracy and Social Justice organization had filed a PIL demanding reservation for the OBC category in proportion to its population. Advocates Rameshwar Singh Thakur and Vinayak Prasad Shah appeared on behalf of the petitioners and Additional Advocate General Harpreet Singh Rooprah and Amit Seth appeared on behalf of the state government.
Gave one month time instead of 10 days
During the hearing on Friday, the double bench of Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Vivek Jain asked the government why not give an interim order of 27 percent reservation to OBCs and subject the final decision on all the petitions to it. On this, objection was presented by the government and it was said that Solicitor General Tushar Mehta will present the case in these cases.
Divide the case into five parts
Madhya Pradesh High Court directed Advocate General Prashant Singh to classify all the cases related to OBC reservation into five parts. First are those petitions which are against giving 27 percent reservation to OBCs and second are those which are in support of it.
Those cases should be kept in one category in which the 87:13 percent formula has been challenged as per the opinion of the General Administration Department and the Advocate General. Those petitions should be kept in one category in which the holding of appointment of candidates has been challenged. In the fifth category, petitions demanding reservation for OBCs in proportion to their population should be included.
Answer sought by 20th December on selling temple land
The double bench of Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Vivek Jain of the Jabalpur bench of the High Court has sought a reply on the attitude of selling the temple land. In this regard, notices have been issued to the state government, Principal Secretary, Collector of Tikamgarh, SDM and TI and others. The next hearing is scheduled for December 20.
The stand was presented on behalf of public interest petitioner Khemchand Ahirwar. It was argued that Hanuman temple was established with the cooperation of the villagers in village Bagora, district Tikamgarh. Hanuman temple was built on government land. The temple is a symbol of people’s faith and a large number of people come to visit.
