2023 Vikram Award: MP High Court Issues Notice On Mountaineer Madhusudan Patidar's Appeal

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Thursday (January 22), issued notice on an appeal preferred by mountaineer Madhusudan Patidar challenging his exclusion from the 2023 Vikram Award (Adventure Sports Category).

Patidar, before the Single bench, had alleged 'inaction and discrimination' by the State in selecting mountaineer Bhawna Dehariya (respondent no 3) for the award. 

The single bench had however dismissed Patidar's plea, holding him ineligible for consideration under the MP Award Rules, 2021, as his Mount Everest summit, an essential basis for his claim, fell outside the prescribed five-year window, as he had summited on May 21, 2017.

The division bench of Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf directed,

"Issue notice. Notice accepted by the learned counsel appearing for 1,2 and 3. Place for consideration after two weeks". 

Per Patidar's appeal, the Single judge erred in strictly applying the 'last five years' achievement period prescribed under Section 4(5)(i) while ignoring the selection criteria, which specifically mandate conferring the award based on seniority and selection. 

Further, the appeal stated that the selection of mountaineer Bhawna Dehariya (respondent no 3) was inconsistent with the prescribed rules, as the appellant was a senior, having summited Mount Everest in 2017. 

Furthermore, it was stated that the selection of Dehariya was based on age as seniority, which is not one of the criteria prescribed under the Rules, 2021. Therefore, this reliance of the Selection committee on an extraneous criterion results in arbitrariness in the selection process. 

The appeal further asserted that the judgment passed by the Single Judge creates an 'anomalous situation' where any athlete who broke major milestones early would be disqualified, and a junior athlete with a later milestone is preferred. 

The appeal also stated that the Single Judge overlooked the fact that the respondents had violated Rule 9(1)(i) as they failed to issue notification conferring the Vikram Award for the year 2022, in which only the appellant was the sole contender. 

Further, the Single Judge also failed to appreciate the later notification of May 23, 2023, which restricted the period for the selection criteria from April 1, 2018, to March 31, 2023. This notification effectively barred the senior-most achiever athlete from consideration due to the State's own administrative failure to issue notification for the year 2022. 

Additionally, it was argued that the Single Judge failed to appreciate that the 'continuous participation' clause under Rule 4(5)(i). Per the petition, continuous participation means that the senior achiever who applies for the award has neither retired nor become inactive. 

Thus, the appeal seeks to quash the order of the Single Judge as well as to quash the decision of the Selection Board in selecting Dehariya over Patidar. 

The case is scheduled for listing after two weeks. 

Case Title: Madhusudan Patidar v State [WA - 3567/2025]

For Appellant: Advocates Siddarth Iyer, Ankur Tiwari and Manish Ahuja