2026:CGHC:16086 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1591 of 2026 Rohini Hirwani D/o Chhabi Ram Aged About 26 Years Category Obc (Non Creamy Layer), R/o Ward No. 13, Aamapara Balod, Tahsil Balod, District Balod Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus

1 - Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvyapam) Through Its Chairperson, Vyapam Bhawan, North Block, Sector 19, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2 - Exam Controller Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal, Vyapam Bhawan, North Block, Sector 19, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Govind Prasad Dewangan, Advocate.

For Respondents : Mr. Avinash Singh, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi

Order On Board

08-4-2026

1. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :-

for the entire records in relates to the case of the petitioner from the possession of respondents for its kind perusal.

direct the respondents authority to consider the case of the petitioner for the correction of the category status as “Non-

Creamy Layer” candidate on the basis of caste certificate submitted by the petitioner and further be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to issue afresh Certificate of Teacher Eligibility Test in favour of the petitioner after correction of the category status.

10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief/relief’s in favour of the petitioners, which the Hon’ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the petitioner submitted an Online form (Annexure P-1) to appear in the Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) for the year 2026, conducted by the respondents. While filing Online form (Annexure P-1), the petitioner inadvertently mentioned her category as ‘OBC Creamy Lawyer’, but in fact, she belongs to ‘OBC Non-Creamy Lawyer’. He further submits that she has submitted a representation for correction of her category, therefore, he submits that, the respondents may be directed to consider the case of the petitioner and decide the representation submitted by the petitioner by treating her category as ‘OBC Non-Creamy Lawyer’ in place of ‘OBC Creamy Lawyer’.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that, specific instructions have been issued by the respondents for filing of Online form, according to which, last date of filing of Online form was 8-12- 2025 and any mistake can be corrected from 9-12-2025 till 11-12-2025. He further submits that, similar matter came up before this Court in Writ Appeal No. 770/2024 (Dharmendra Kumar Vs. Chhattisgarh Vyavasyik Pariksha Mandal (CGVyapam and Anr.) (Annexure R-2), wherein vide Judgment dated 21-11-2024, learned Division Bench did not accept the submission of petitioner therein in that regard and the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by that judgment. He further submits that, similar view has also been reiterated by learned Division Bench in Writ Appeal No. 11/2025 (Preeti -v- Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board (Cgvyapam and Anr.), therefore he submits that, this writ petition deserves to be rejected out rightly.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

5. As per the clause 3 of instructions issued by the respondents correction in the Online form could be done from 1^st date after last date of filing of form till 3 days i.e. till 11-12-2025. In the instant case, the petitioner filed representation after declaration of result, which is far beyond the stipulated period, as has been provided in the instructions.

6. Having considered the aforesaid clear instructions issued by the respondents and in the light of the view taken by learned Division Bench of this Court in afore-cited cases, this Court is not inclined to entertain instant writ pet