2025:CGHC:60115 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4617 of 2021

1 - Jyoti Rai W/o Chitrangad Lal Rai (D/o Saheb Ram Bandey) Aged About 41 Years R/o HIFZURRAHMAN Village And Post Mohara, Tahsil Gurur District Balod Chhattisgarh, District : Balod, ANSARI Chhattisgarh Digitally signed by ... Petitioner HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Date: 2025.12.15

16:50:47 +0530 versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director, Directorate Of Public Instruction Chhattisgarh Raipur Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Joint Director Education Division Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner : Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

Order On Board

10.12.2025

1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for the following relief(s);

“(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash impugned order dated 13/8/21 (Annexure P-1) and direct the respondent to consider the petitioner for appointment on the post of Teacher (English) T cadre and appoint the petitioner accordingly, as per order of merit, in the interest of justice.

(ii) Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents issued an advertisement for the appointment of Teachers in various subjects. The petitioner applied for the post of Teacher (English) under the Scheduled Caste (SC) category. The petitioner was found successful and called for document verification. Initially, document verification was scheduled for 21.01.2021. Upon verification of the petitioner’s documents and she was found to be in order and an offer of appointment was issued which the petitioner accepted. It was further observed that the appointment letter would be issued once the schools which had been closed due to the COVID-19 pandemic reopened. However, later vide the impugned communication dated 13.08.2021 (Annexure P/1), the petitioner’s candidature was rejected on the grounds that the caste certificate submitted by the petitioner was not issued by a competent authority, i.e., the Sub-Divisional Officer (SDO). The petitioner submits that at the time of document verification, the caste certificate issued by the Tahsildar was submitted which is a competent authority and the documents were found in order at that time. Furthermore, the petitioner has since obtained the permanent caste certificate which is now appended to the covering memo. Therefore, he seeks the setting aside of the impugned order and the grant of the relief claimed.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents/State opposes the submissions and submits that the advertisement clearly stipulated a condition that all necessary documents must be submitted at the time of document verification. This included ensuring that candidates possessed the minimum academic qualifications and other certificates before the declaration of the result by the examining agency. The advertisement also specifically mentioned that certificates submitted after the declaration of the result would not be considered. She further submits that Clause 8 of the advertisement requires candidates to submit a permanent caste certificate issued by the competent authority in order to avail the benefits of age relaxation and reservation. Since the petitioner failed to submit the permanent caste certificate from the competent authority (i.e., the Sub-Divisional Officer), the benefit of age relaxation/reservation could not be extended to the petitioner and the impugned order may not be interfered with by this Court.

4. After giving patient hearing to the learned counsel for both parties, the records of the case have be