1 2025:CGHC:43414 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2577 of 2022 1 - Rahate Pratima Pandurang W/o Bharat Kumar Gonde Aged About 47 Years R/o Qr. No. 7/b, Street-3, Sector-1, Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director Public Instructions, Sanchalnalaya, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Divisional Joint Director Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Shri C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Topilal Bareth, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 26.08.2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no. 3 to declare the petitioner eligible for the post of Teacher (English) and further set-aside the ineligibility order dated 21.01.2021 (Annexure P-1). 10.2. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no. 3 to consider the petitioner for the post of Teacher (English). 10.3. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as it may deems fit and appropriate.” NIRMALA RAO 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that pursuant to the advertisement issued by respondent No.2, the petitioner submitted her application for the post of Teacher (English) as a candidate of the unreserved category. He would further submit that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Maharashtra, where her caste comes within the OBC Category. He would contend that due to a mistake, she marked herself as a member of the OBC candidate in the OMR Sheet in the State of Chhattisgarh, but in the application form, she indicated herself as a member of the general category. He would also submit that the petitioner was selected and in the written examination, she secured 51.862 marks; however, her candidature was rejected on the ground that she identified herself as OBC in the OMR sheet. He would also contend that candidates in the open category with lower marks than the petitioner have been selected and appointed. Therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to consideration. He would argue that a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to consider the claim of the petitioner as a candidate of the unreserved category. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that the petitioner wrongly showed herself as a member of the OBC Category in the OMR sheet; therefore, her name was included in the list of ineligible candidates. He would contend that the petition deserves to be dismissed. 3 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on the record. 5. The petitioner has shown herself as a member of the OBC category in the OMR sheet, but at the same time, in the application form, she has reflected herself as a member of the general category. She participated in the recruitment process and qualified. She was in the select list, having secured 51.862 marks. It is apparent from the merit list (Annexure-P/7) that the candidates in the open category who secured lower marks than the petitioner for the post of Teacher (English) have been selected and appointed, but the name of the petitioner was not considered solely on the ground that she mentioned her category as the OBC in the OMR sheet. 6. Considering the fact that the petitioner has shown herself as a general category candidate in the application form and has secured higher marks than the selected candidates, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the claim of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Teacher (English) in the female category strictly in accordance with the law. 7. The entire exercise shall be completed, preferably within a period of 90 days. The interim order is hereby vacated. 8. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi