1 2025:CGHC:34761-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 503 of 2025 Digambar Singh S/o Late Shri M. P. Singh Aged About 42 Years R/o Ward No. 12, House No. 51/5, Nandini Nagar, Durg, Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Department Of Health And Family Welare, Through The Secretary, Capital Complex, 3rd Floor, New Raipur, Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Directorate Of Health Service, Indirawati Bhawan, 3rd Floor, New Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Chief Medical And Health Officer Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Distt. Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal , Advocate For Respondent / State : Mr. Y.S. Thakur, Addl A.G. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.07.23 10:31:20 +0530 2 Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 22.07.2025 1. The present writ appeal has been filed assailing the order dated 17.04.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in WPS No. 755 of 2017, by which, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the petition filed by the writ petitioner. 2. The brief facts as projected by the petitioner is that on 17/08/2016, the appellant/ writ petitioner applied for the post of Pharmacist Grade 2 as per the advertisement dated 18/07/2016.Thereafter, admit card was issued and subsequently exam was conducted on 25/09/2016. Result was declared and the petitioner stood 5th in the merit list of the over-all district of Respondent No.3. Petitioner was neither given any appointment letter nor called for verification of the documents by the respondents despite his best effort and suddenly he was socked to know that the final merit list was prepared wherein he was declared absent/disqualified. Thereafter, petitioner made a request for verification of records and to seek information about the selection process vide his representation dated 31/12/2016 however, the Respondent No.3 directed him to visit the website of the Respondent No.3. Thereafter from the website of Respondent No.3, petitioner came to know that after completion of selection test, neither any intimation was given to 3 the petitioner about further procedures to be conducted nor was any other intimation received by the Petitioner from the respondents. Therefore, the petitioner assailed his disqualification on various grounds that his disqualification was illegal as no order of appointment was given before verification of documents as per clause 22 of the advertisement wherein it was mentioned that the verification of documents of the selected candidates will be verified at the time of appointment; respondents have not made any communication to the petitioner regarding verification of documents. 3. In the order under challenge, the learned Single Judge has observed as under:- “4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on the record. 5. Admittedly, the aspirants were informed to appear for verification of documents through the publication of a notice on the website, in the newspaper and by affixing a notice on the notice board of the Chief Medical & Health Officer, Rajnandgaon but the petitioner failed to appear on the scheduled date for verification of documents, therefore, he was declared disqualified. Further, the recruitment process was completed in the year 2017-18 and the petitioner has 4 not impleaded the selected candidates as party respondents. 6 Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts, I do not find any good ground to interfere in the matter. 7. Consequently, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). 4. The writ appeal has been filed by the appellant/ Digambar Singh reiterating the same plea and praying for quashing the disqualification/ rejection of the petitioner and for verification of the documents of the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner applied for the post of Pharmascist Grade-II pursuant to an advertisement dated 18.07.2016 issued by respondent No. 2 thorugh the CG Vyapam and he secured 5th rank in the merit list. He further submits that the petitioner was declared disqualified and the petitioner was never communicated to appear before the authorites for verification of documents. He further submits that petitioner has been selected in the merit list on his own merit and hard work and cannot be deprived of his fundamental right only on the basis that he did not appear for verification of documents. He further submits that no proper notice was issued for intimation of verification and thus the writ appeal deserves to be allowed. 5 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that the date for verification of documents was fixed by the CG Vyapam and due notice was published on its website, in the newspapers and a copy of notice was affixed on the notice board of the office of the Chief Medical Health Officer. He would further contend the petitioner failed to appear for verification of documents on the scheduled date, therefore, he was declared disqualified. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available in the record. 8. Upon bare perusal of the impugned order and the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition that admittedly, the aspirants were informed to appear for verification of documents through the publication of a notice on the website, in the newspaper and by affixing a notice on the notice board of the Chief Medical & Health Officer, Rajnandgaon but the petitioner failed to appear on the scheduled date for verification of documents, therefore, he was declared disqualified. Further, the recruitment process was completed in the year 2017-18 and the petitioner has not impleaded the selected candidates as party respondents. 6 9. It is a trite law that no order can be passed behind the back of a person adversely affecting him and such an order, if passed, is liable to be ignored being not binding on such a party as the same has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. (See: Ranjan Kumar & Others v State of Bihar & Others1). 10. For the reasons discussed hereinabove, we are of the considered view that the learned Single Judge has not committed any illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error, warranting interference of this Court. 11. Accordingly, the writ appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed at the motion stage itself. SD/- SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Jyoti/ Gowri 1. (2014) 16 SCC 187