Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4063 of 2017 1 - Dr. Namarata Saraf W/o Shri Vikas Saraf Aged About 32 Years R/o H.No. 104, Konda Gali, Nayapara, Baloda Bazar, District- Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh
... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Its Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Mantralaya,
Mahanadi
Bhawan,
Naya
Raipur,
Chhattisgarh 2 - The Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission, Through- Secretary, Shanker Nagar Road, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Shri Chandrikaditya Pandey, Advocate For State/Respondent No.1 : Ms. Neelima Singh Thakur, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.2 : Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Order on Board 05/08/2025
1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking following reliefs:
“10.1 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the matters. Digitally signed by GOPAL SINGH Date: 2025.08.06 18:38:02 +0530
2 10.2 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no. 02 for considering the name of the petitioner as eligible candidate for the post of Assistant Professor in Commerce subject. 10.3 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no. 02 for making arrangement of interview of the petitioner for the aforesaid post so that she may get selection. 10.4 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deem fit.”
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that pursuant to an advertisement issued on 5.9.2014 the petitioner submitted her application for the post of Assistant Professor (Commerce). He would contend that the petitioner is a member of Other Backward Class (OBC) and she submitted an application form taking benefit of that category. He would further submit that as the petitioner had submitted OBC certificate issued by the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh), therefore, her candidature was rejected and she was not permitted to participate in the interview. He would submit that the respondent authorities ought to have treated the petitioner as a candidate belonging to general category. He would submit that direction may be issued to the respondents authorities to consider the name of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor in Commerce subject. 3
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and respondent No.2 would oppose the petition. They would submit that advertisement was issued, examinations were conducted and thereafter appointment orders were issued to the selected candidates. They would further submit that the petitioner has not arrayed selected/appointed candidates as party respondents in the present petition. They would also submit that the petitioner herself has submitted OBC certificate issued by the authority of the State of Madhya Pradesh. The said certificate is not issued by the State of Chhattisgarh. They would contend that this petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 5. As the petitioner is a member of OBC belonging to State of Madhya Pradesh and she made attempt to take benefit of that category in the State of Chhattisgarh by participating in the recruitment examination and her candidature was rejected on the ground that the OBC certificate issued by the authority of State of Madhya Pradesh would not be admissible in the State of Chhattisgarh and, therefore, she was not permitted to participate in the interview. The petitioner herself has annexed copy of the merit list of the final selection, but, she has not arrayed the selected/appointed candidates as party respondents in this petition. Further, she has not stated as to
4 against which category she is claiming her appointment. Therefore also, the petition is not maintainable. 6. Taking into consideration the above facts, I do not find any merit in the writ petition.
It is accordingly dismissed. Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
JUDGE Gopal