When a recruitment advertisement stipulates that selection will follow a procedure prescribed by the government, candidates who participate in that process cannot challenge specific criteria within the formulated procedure, provided the advertisement provided for such a government-defined process.

Order On Board

1. As both the writ petitions are arising out of same recruitment proceeding which is under challenge in both the writ petitions and grounds of challenge are also one and the same, therefore, both the writ petitions are taken up for hearing analogously and are being disposed of by this common order.

2. Petitioner in WPS No.3832 of 2025 has sought for following reliefs:

(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash Annexure P/1 by which objection has been rejected and merit list has been issued and direction may be issued to prepare selection list only on the basis of marks of examination as per clause 6 and 7 of the advertisement by not including marks of experience in the interest of justice.

(ii) That this Honble Court may also kindly declare that awarding of marks of experience is illegal as it is contrary to terms of advertisement,

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

3. Petitioner in WPS No.4135 of 2025 has sought for following relief:

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the Letter dated 27/05/2025, bearing No.Stha./Va.Cha./2025/283, issued by respondent no.3.

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Driver in the office of Forest Conservator (Karya Aayojna), Forest Division Bilaspur.

10.3 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

4. Learned counsel appearing for both the petitioners would jointly submit that petitioners have submitted application for their appointment on the post of Driver pursuant to advertisement issued by respondent No.2. In the advertisement there is no mention of award of marks for experience also. When respondents have declared the select list mentioning the marks awarded to candidates for experience also, they have filed these writ petitions challenging the same. They contended that selection ought to have been made based on marks secured by candidates in skill test and practical test only. There is no mention in advertisement that any marks is to be awarded towards experience. In support of their contention they also refer to Clause 6 & 7 of the advertisement.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes submission of learned counsel for the petitioners and would submit that in the advertisement in particular para-6, there is clear mention that recruitment proceedings would be based on procedure to be prescribed by State Govt. in this regard. At the time of issuing advertisement, there was no prescribed procedure. However, it was published on 26.07.2023. He contended that when once in the advertisement there is mention that after receipt of application further procedure is to be adopted based on procedure to be formulated by State Govt. and petitioners pursuant to procedure formulated, have appeared in skill test and practical test then they cannot object to part of procedure which provides for award of marks based on their experience, which provides for 2 marks for 2 years’ experience and accordingly it is to be increased and maximum 10 marks are to be awarded for experience.

6. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 in WPS No.3832 of 2025 also adopts the submission made by learned counsel for the State.

7. I have heard lea