##PAGE1##

1

2026:CGHC:15278-DB

NAFR Digitally signed by BABLU BABLU RAJENDRA RAJENDRA BHANARKAR

BHANARKARDate: HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

2026.04.04 10:40:14 +0530

WA No. 263 of 2026

Aishwary Netam S/o Shivjee Netam Aged About 28 Years R/o Village And Post Kukrel, Tehsil- Nagri, District- Dhamtari, C.G.

... Appellant(s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Transport, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, C.G.

2 - Secretary General Administrative Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, C.G.

3 - Transport Commissioner Department Of Transport, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, C.G.

4 - Deputy Secretary Department Of Transport, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, C.G.

5 - Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission Through Its Secretary, North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, C.G.

... Respondent(s)

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate For Respondents No.1 to : Mr. Praveen Das, Add. A.G.

4/State For Respondent No.5/PSC : Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate

For Intervenor : Mr. Syed Majid Ali, Advocate.

2

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

Judgment on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

02.04.2026

1. Heard Mr. Shobit Koshta, learned counsel for the appellant. Also

heard Mr. Praveen Das, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for respondents No.1 to 4/State as well as Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, learned counsel for respondent No.5/PSC and Mr. Syed

Majid Ali, learned counsel for the Intervenor.

2. This writ appeal is presented assailing the order dated 28.01.2026

passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(S) No. 3602 of 2024 (Dev Ashish Pradhan vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others) whereby, the writ petition filed by the appellant herein was

dismissed by the learned Single Judge.

3. Brief facts necessary for disposal of the case are that the

appellant, pursuant to advertisement dated 13.04.2022 issued by the Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission, Raipur, applied for and was selected as Transport Sub Inspectors (Technical) and was appointed vide order dated 08.09.2022, however, his appointment was challenged by an intervener, Ashish Minj, in Writ Petition (S) No. 5206 of 2023, wherein upon scrutiny of recruitment records, it was found that the appellant did not meet the prescribed minimum height requirement of 165 cm for male candidates. Thereafter, the appellant sought relaxation in height

3

under Circular dated 31.07.2001 issued by the General Administration Department, but his request was rejected by the Department vide proceedings dated 25.09.2023 on the ground that such relaxation cannot be granted post-appointment and is applicable only where posts remain unfilled due to lack of eligible candidates. Aggrieved by the rejection and the impugned order dated 19.06.2024, the appellant has filed the present writ petition seeking quashment of the said order, reinstatement in service with consequential benefits, and consideration of their case in light of the aforesaid circular, the same was dismissed vide order dated 28.01.2026 in WPS No.3602 of 2024, giving rise to the present

writ appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits the learned Single

Judge failed to appreciate that the advertisement dated 13.04.2022 provided for a common examination for the posts of Assistant Regional Transport Officer and Transport Sub Inspector (Technical), but contained ambiguity regarding height relaxation. While relaxation for Scheduled Tribe (ST) candidates was expressly provided for one post, no such clarity existed for the other, thereby creating confusion. In such circumstances, the appellant cannot be faulted for any alleged ineligibility arising out of vague advertisement conditions. He further submits that the appellant, belonging to the Scheduled Tribe category, was entitled to relaxation in height in terms of the State Government Circular dated 31.07.2001, which permits such relaxation with approval of