1 / 5 2025:CGHC:41004-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 412 of 2025 1 - Rekha Chandra W/o Pushpendra Chandra Aged About 33 Years Presently Posted As Deputy Collector, At Raigarh, Chhattisgarh . R/o Qarter No. E-07, Nagar Nigam Awas, Tv Tower Road, Raigarh Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of General Administration, Mantrayalay, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Under Secretary Department Of General Administration, Mantrayalay, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Commissioner Durg Division, Durg Chhattisgarh. 4 - Collector Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 5 - Collector Kabirdham, District Kabirdham (C.G.) 6 - Additional Collector Kabirdham, District Kabirdham (C.G.) ---- Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant(s) : Ms. Zainab Mustafa Vanak, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate For Intervenor : Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri R avindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.08.14 19:38:43 +0530 2 / 5 Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J. 14/08/2025 1. The writ appeal has been filed by the writ appellant against the interim order dated 02-05-2025, passed by learned Single Judge, in WPS No. 3646 of 2023 (Rekha Chandra v. State of Chhattisgarh and others), whereby the Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, State of Chhattisgarh is directed to constitute a State Medical Board for examining the petitioner medically and submit a report with regard to her disability, which she is suffering and the interim order granted on 16-06-2023 directing that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the notice (Annexure P/1), is continued till the next date of hearing. 2. The facts of the present case are that, the petitioner filed WPS No. 3646 of 2023 against show cause notice dated 16.05.2023 issued to the appellant by the State Government, whereby she was directed to get verified her disability certificate from the State Medical Board. The appellant is claimed to be differently abled person suffering from 43% hearing impairment. A disability certificate was issued to her by the competent authority. The appellant participated in a recruitment process and was appointed to the post of Deputy Collector. A complaint was made by the Chhattisgarh Divyang Seva Sangh against the appellant and some other persons to the effect that, they obtained the disability certificate in a fraudulent manner. The notice was issued to the appellant on 16-05-2023, which is challenged by her in the said writ petition. In the said writ petition, an interim order was passed on 16-06-2023 to the effect that no coercive steps shall be taken against 3 / 5 the petitioner pursuant to the notice (Annexure P/1) till the next date of hearing. On 02-05-2025, the Writ Court modified the interim order and granted liberty to the respondents to proceed against the appellant, but they have been restrained from taking a final decision without the leave of the Court. Further, a direction was issued for medical examination of the appellant in accordance with the provisions of the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, in a fair and transparent manner. The Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare has been directed to constitute a State Medical Board for examination of the appellant and other similarly situated candidates and to submit its report. The appellant has challenged the order dated 02-05-2025 in the present writ appeal. 3. It has been pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the parties that, in some of the identical matters, the coordinate bench of this Court has dismissed the WA No. 338 of 2025 (Dr. Rajkumar Jaiswal v. State of Chhattisgarh and others) vide order dated 27-05-2025, observing the following terms:- “8. Admittedly, there is a dispute with regard to the disability certificate issued in favour of the appellant. The appellant was appointed to the post of Assistant Veterinary Surgeon on the basis of the disability certificate. A complaint was made and the certificate of the appellant and other selected candidates was examined by a three member committee. A report was submitted and findings were recorded in favour of the appellant and other selected candidates. It appears that the disability certificates and persons suffering from 4 / 5 disabilities were not examined by the Medical Board or any expert body, therefore, the department issued show-cause notices to the appellant and other selected candidates and those notices were challenged by filing various writ petitions. The Writ Court vide order dated 21.6.2023 passed a protective order in favour of the appellant and other selected candidates. Vide order dated 2.5.2025, the writ Court permitted the State to continue with the proceedings but restrained them from passing the final order and in the meanwhile, directed the Secretary, Department of Health of Family Welfare to constitute a State Medical Board for examination of the appellant and other selected candidates and to submit a report. 9. The appellant has not assailed the interim order passed in the writ petition dated 2.5.2025 rather he has sought a part stay, which cannot be granted. A perusal of the order dated 2.5.2025 would show that the interim order is still operating in favour of the appellant. No order has been passed affecting his rights, therefore, the writ appeal is not maintainable. The appellant would be at liberty to raise all the grounds available to him before the writ Court. 10. Accordingly, in our opinion, the present appeal is liable to be and is hereby dismissed.” 4. They submitted that since the facts and issue involved in the present case are identical to that of WA No. 338 of 2025, this appeal may be disposed of in the same terms. 5 / 5 5. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the materials on record, it is evident that the facts and issue involved in this appeal are identical to WA No. 338 of 2025, decided on 27-05-2025, hence this Court deems it appropriate, not to take a view other than what has been taken in WA No. 338 of 2025. 6. Accordingly, the present writ appeal is also dismissed in terms of the order dated 27-05-2025 passed in WA No. 338 of 2025 (Dr. Rajkumar Jaiswal v. State of Chhattisgarh and others). Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice ved