1 2025:CGHC:2075 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3916 of 2024 1 - Rameshwari Maheshwari (Before Marriage As Rameshwari Khande) W/o Shri Ravipal Maheshwari Aged About 39 Years R/o Shristi Samridhi Colony, Bodri, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur, C.G. 2 - Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board Through Its, Director, Vyapam Bhawan, North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Controller (Exam Center For Set-2024) Govt. Higher Secondary School, Rajendra Nagar, Nehru Chowk, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Bharat Lal Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri S.S. Choubey, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent no. 2 : Ms. Akansha Singh, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri Avinash Singh, Advocate. SHOAIB ANWAR Digitally signed by SHOAIB ANWAR Date: 2025.01.14 23:51:02 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board 13.01.2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking following reliefs:- 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be issue direction to respondent no2 for scheduling / arrange / conduct 'Chhattisgarh State Eligibility test (SET) 2024' for petitioner. 10.2 "That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be direct to respondent no. 2 to issue guidelines regarding 'change of Candidates surname' for the purposes of examination, and further to train the Examination In- charge for document verification. 10.3 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be direct the respondent no. 2 to and further to train the 'Examination In- charge' for document verification, and to take appropriate action against respondent no. 3. 10.4 Any other relief (including compensation on account of mental "harassment and educational loss), which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in favor of petitioner, may also be granted. 2. As far as the relief clause 10.1 is concerned, the same cannot be granted at this stage and as far as the relief sought by the petitioner to issue guidelines and directions to the respondent no. 2 to train the Examination In-Charge for document verification are concerned, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2 submits that there is already guidelines available with the board and the proper training are being given to the Invigilator and Examination In-Charge of the 3 schools. Hence, it is not required to give any guidelines to the respondent no. 2. As far as the compensation sought by the petitioner, the same cannot be assessed or granted in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as disputed facts are involved in the issue raised by the petitioner and the same has been controverted by the respondent no. 2 in the reply filed by them. 3. Hence, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Shoaib