Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 15465

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Ramu Ram Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
WPS No. 2708 of 2014

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Goutam Khetrapal
For the Respondents: Supriya Upasane, Anand Shukla

A candidate does not acquire an indefeasible right to appointment by inclusion in a merit list. The state may decline to fill vacancies provided the decision is bona fide, and if the recruitment process violates statutory rules or the cadre is reorganized, no mandamus for appointment can be issued.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 16 - Recruitment process - Public employment - Validity of selection and claimed right to appointment - Mere inclusion in a merit list does not confer an indefeasible right to appointment - State cannot arbitrarily deny appointment but the process must be based on valid statutory rules - Any advertisement or recruitment process not in conformity with the relevant service rules lacks legal foundation and cannot be enforced. (Paras 26, 28, 29, 31)

(B) Administrative Law - Recruitment rules - Service cadre - Merger and absorption - Policy decision-making - Authorities may decide not to fill vacancies for bona fide reasons or when the recruitment process is found to be based on an unrecognized category under statute - Subsequent absorption of a cadre into a higher department and the surrender of vacant posts extinguishes the original capacity to make appointments. (Paras 25, 32, 34)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners applied for the post of assistant teachers under a local body based on an advertisement that included a non-statutory subject category. After appearing in the merit list, the candidates were not issued appointment orders. The screening committee subsequently found the recruitment process regarding that category to be inconsistent with the statutory service rules and recommended a fresh advertisement after obtaining clarification. Meanwhile, the provincial government suspended the recruitment proceedings, and later, the entire cadre of local body teachers was absorbed into the state school education department, rendering the original vacant posts defunct.

Findings of Court:
The Court held that the recruitment process for the category in question was not in consonance with the governing service rules, as no such subject category existed under the statute. Furthermore, the selection process never attained finality and was legally halted by executive orders prior to any appointments. The subsequent merger of the local cadre into the education department extinguished the available vacancies.

Issues: Whether the candidates acquired an indefeasible right to appointment upon appearing in the merit list and whether the denial of appointment due to the non-conformity of the recruitment process with statutory rules and subsequent cadre absorption was arbitrary.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that there is no vested or indefeasible right to be appointed merely by appearing in a selection list. State action is only justiciable if it is arbitrary, and here, the decision was based on the non-existence of a statutory basis for the subject category and a bona fide policy decision to suspend and subsequently reorganize the cadre, which eliminates the possibility of relief.

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. procedural history and factual background regarding the recruitment dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. contentions regarding arbitrary denial of appointment and violation of equality. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
3. state's defense regarding non-compliance with rules and administrative abeyance. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
4. scope of judicial review and status of earlier orders. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
5. statutory rules, administrative notifications, and the 2018 absorption policy. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)
6. requirement of strict compliance with recruitment rules. (Para 25 , 26 , 27)
7. no indefeasible right to appointment via mere selection list inclusion. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31)
8. inapplicability of negative equality and impact of cadre abolition/merger. (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35)
9. final determination regarding lack of enforceable right. (Para 36 , 37 , 38)

CAV Order

1. The petitioners have filed the instant writ petition claiming the appointment orders on the post of Assistant Teacher in the Municipal Council, Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara. The petitioners have filed the writ petition claiming the following reliefs:-

10.1. That the Hon'ble Court may be kind enough to call for the records of the case of the petitioners from the respondents.

10.2. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue suitable order/writ/ direction directing the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioners for the appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher and issue them appointment letters in the Nagar Palika Parishad, Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara.

10.3. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner together with cost of the petition.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the Respondent No. 3 issued an advertisement on 17.06.2013 (Annexure P-1) for recruitment to the post of Lecturer/Teacher/Assistant Teacher. The petitioners have applied for the post of Assistant Teacher (Local Bodies), considering that they possess the requisite qualifications. After scrutiny of the application forms, documents and educational qualifications, the list of eligible candidates was published. After calling the objections and resolving the same, the final list was published in which the names of the petitioners are found at Sr. No. 1, 2 and 3 in the list of Assistant Teacher (Local Bodies). However, on 29.01.2014, a meeting of the scrutiny committee was held, and another select list and wait list were prepared in which the names of the petitioners do not find place. In the said meeting, it was decided that there shall be fresh advertisements regarding five posts of Assistant Teachers (Local Bodies). Thereafter, on 25.02.2014, the petitioners moved a detailed representation to the Collector, Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara, and when their representation was not considered, they filed the present writ petition.

3. Earlier, the writ petition was allowed by the coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 25.09.2024, and the respondent authorities were directed to issue appointment letters to the petitioners within 45 days from the date of receipt of the order. The order dated 25.09.2024 was challenged by the State Government by filing the Writ Appeal No. 194/2025, which is decided by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court on 09.10.2025 and by allowing the writ appeal, the order dated 25.09.2024 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to this Court for deciding the case afresh after impleading the Secretary, School Education Department, Government of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, as the party respondent in the writ petition, and after providing the opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the action of the respondent authorities in not issuing appointment orders to the petitioners on the post of Assistant Teacher, despite their having participated in the selection process and having secured p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 15465

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPURRavindra Kumar Agrawal, JRamu Ram Sahu – AppellantVersusState Of Chhattisgarh – RespondentWPS No. 2708 of 2014

A candidate does not acquire an indefeasible right to appointment by inclusion in a merit list. The state may decline to fill vacancies provided the decision is bona fide, and if the recruitment process violates statutory rules or the cadre is reorganized, no mandamus for appointment can be issued.

Cases Referred (5)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Ramu Ram Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
WPS No. 2708 of 2014