1 2025:CGHC:33378 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3260 of 2016 • Amrit Nagar S/o Shri Bajranglal Nagar, Aged About 41 Years R/o D-20, Aanand Vihar, Gulmohar Vatika, Mahavirnagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner. versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Director, Sanchanalaya, Swasthya Sewayen, Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya Parisar, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh 2. Director, Bhartiya Chikitsa Padhti Avm Homeopathi Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. Registrar, Chhattisgarh Ayurved Tatha Unini Chikitsha Padhti Avm Praikritik Chikitsha Board, Govt. Aayurved Mahavidhyalay Chikitshalaya Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5. Collector, Office Collector, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 6. Pangiyak/ Registrar, Rajkiya Aayurvedic Avm Unani Chikitsa Parishad, Patna, District Patna Bihar , District : Patna, Bihar. --- Respondents. WPC No. 4085 of 2022 1. Dr. Jamaluddin Qureshi S/o Jiyauddin Qureshi Aged About 55 Years R/o Bazar Para Tehsil Hathband,, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 2 2. Dr. Pathan Nawab Khan S/o Amir Khan Aged About 63 Years R/o Hig 98 Bhilai, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 3. Dr. Arun Kumar Dewangan S/o K.S. Dewangan Aged About 60 Years R/o Ward No. 3 Chikhili, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 4. Dr. Sandeep Agrawal S/o Abhimanyu Agrawal, Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Baniyapara, Tehsil Dhamdha, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 5. Dr. Vishnu Prasad S/o Suk Lal Aged About 52 Years R/o Dhangaon Kumardad Tehsil Chhuriya, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 6. Dr. Ratan Kumar Mandal S/o Shital Chandra Mandal Aged About 58 Years R/o Ward No. 7 Cinema Line, Tehsil Dongragaon, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 7. Dr. Jagdish Verma S/o Banwali Lal Verma Aged About 53 Years R/o Ward No. 9, Mura, Bangoli, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 8. Gunjan Kumar Biswas S/o Late Mohan Kumar Biswas Aged About 54 Years R/o Rajiv Gandhi Ward No. 11 Tehsil Gandai, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 9. Dr. Arvind Sarkar S/o Atul Sarkar Aged About 56 Years R/o Gurughasi Das Chowk, Ward No. 18, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh 10. Dr. Bidhan Chandra Biswas S/o Surendra Nath Biswas Aged About 62 Years R/o Ward No. 16 Karmchari Nagar,, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 11. Dr. Niraj Kumar Chouhan S/o Kanti Lal Chouhan Aged About 60 Years R/o Ward No. 16 Kharora, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioners. Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Nawa Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Directorate, Health And Family Welfare, Department Chhattisgarh, Block -A Third Floor, Indrawati Bhawan, Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3. Registrar, Chhattisgarh Board Of Ayurvedic And Unani System Of Fmedicine And Naturopathy, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Raipur,, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5. Collector, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 6. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Durg,, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 7. Collector, District Durg Chhattisgarh. 8. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Rajnandgaon,, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. 9. Collector, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 3 --- Respondents. For Petitioners. : Mr. J.A. Lohani, Mr. Abdul Wahab Khan and Mr. Aditya Bhardwaj, Advocates. For Respondent/State.: Mr. Kalpesh Ruperal, Panel Lawyer . For respondent No.3 Ms. Sweta Mishra, Advocate. (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas) Order on Board 16/07/2025 1. Since common question of fact and law is involved in both these writ petitions, they are heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The issue involved in both the cases has already been considered by Co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24-4-2001 passed in Writ Petition No. 558 of 2001 wherein Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has passed the following order. “All these aspects, in my view, can be examined by the Competent Authority at the time of consideration. In the result, this petition is disposed of with a direction that the petitioner be given requisite form for enrollment and the same be examined on merit by the Competent Authority, keeping in view the judgment rendered by the M.P. High Court in Writ Petition No. 287/1990 decided on 6-5-1997. The petitioner should enclose a copy of that order with the form while submitting the forms for enrollment”. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners as well as State counsel have not opposed the factual matrix and the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 would submit that the petitioners are not eligible to be considered as they have been issued certificate after cut off date. 4 5. The aforesaid submission made by learned counsel for respondent No.3 cannot be ascertained by this Court at this juncture, therefore, liberty is granted to respondent No.3 to examine the facts of the case whether the petitioners are eligible or not, in accordance with rules before enrolling the petitioner with respondent No.3.. 6. Accordingly, the both writ petitions are disposed of in terms of order dated 24-4-2001 passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP No 558 of 2001. Sd/- (Naremdra Kumar Vyas) JUDGE Raju RAVVA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Digitally signed by RAVVA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Date: 2025.07.21 13:37:38 +0530