SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI

2026:CGHC:11762 Digitally signed by NAFR SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2530 of 2024

1. Jyoti Soni W/o W/o Roshan Lal Swarnkar Aged About 39 Years R/o Block 5-A Street 8 Sector 1, Bhilai , Distt- Durg (CG)

2. Vivek Kumar Patel S/o Bhulau Ram Patel Aged About 41 Years R/o Kachhi Dafai, Chhota Bazar Chirmiri, Distt-

Manendragarh-Chirmiri -Bharatpur (C.G.)

3. Ujjain Kumar S/o Rampratap Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Saskela,post-Salka, Tahsil- Bhaiyathan,distt- Surajpur (C.G.)

4. Trilok Singh S/o Kedar Aged About 32 Years R/o Village -

Semariya, Post - Deorbija, Distt-Bemetara (C.G.)

5. Durgeshwari W/o W/o Amar Singh Aged About 29 Years R/o Village- Navgaon Khurd, Post- Daniya, Tahsil Devkar, Distt-

Bemetara ,chhattisgarh ... Petitioners versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Education,mahanadi Bhawan,mantralaya Atal Nagar,new Raipur,distt- Raipur (C.G.)

2. Director Directorate Of Chhattisgarh Public Instruction Indravati Bhawan,new Raipur Distt- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Divisional Joint Director Divisional Joint Director Education Division Raipur,distt- Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Vivek Verma, Govt. Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

Order On Board

11/03/2026

1. Petitioners have filed this petition seeking following reliefs:-

“i. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the petitioners for appointment with all consequential benefit at the earliest, 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 petitioners submits that petitioners pursuant to advertisement dated 9.3.2019 applied for the post of Teacher. Petitioners were called for documents verification. After verification of documents, petitioners were issued letter stating that they would be called for further verification subject to availability of vacancies. Thereafter, when nothing has been heard by petitioners, even after long lapse of time, they submitted representation before the authority concerned for issuance of appointment/posting order. This representation could not fetch any result. Subsequently, petitioners came to know through a reply filed by respondent State authorities in a matter regarding reservation, that certain posts advertised in the year 2019 could not be filled-up due to non-availability of eligible candidates and the same are still lying vacant. Hence, a direction be issued to respondents to consider candidature of petitioners, who were though called for verification of documents pursuant to advertisement dated 9.3.2019, but not considered for appointment in arbitrary manner, for appointment on the post of Teacher in their respective subject and category. In support of his submission, he places reliance on decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Tej Prakash Pathak & ors vs Rajasthan High Court &

ors, reported in (2025) 2 SCC 1.

He further submits that posts of Teacher (Math) are still lying vacant and there was no provision for providing minimum cut-off marks in the examination, therefore, the selection committee on its own cannot make such provision.

3. Learned State Counsel opposing submissions of learned counsel for petitioners, would submit that after seventh round of counseling, all the posts of category to which petitioners belonged were filled-up. Present petitioners, who applied under OBC category for appointment on the post of Teacher (Maths) and Teacher (Biology), were not selected because they had secured less marks than last candidate who is appointed against last vacancy in the category of petitioners.

He further submits that validity of recruitment under advertisement, Annexure P-4, expired way back on 31.3.2023 and thereafter, the School Education Department has issued new advertisements for appointment