1 2025:CGHC:42897-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 623 of 2025 Ashok Singh Shyam S/o Shri Nanhi Ram Aged About 45 Years Caste- Gond Scheduled Tribe, Occupation Service Posted As Assistant Grade Ii At Girls Higher Secondary School Pratappur Then Now Promoted To The Post Of Accountant At Janpad Panchayat Pratappur Tribal Welfare Department, Post, P.S. And Tehsil- Pratappur, Revenue And Civil District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh, R/o Shankar Ghat, P.S. Kotwali, Post And Tehsil Ambikapur, Revenue And Civil District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - The State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Revenue And Civil District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Commissioner Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe Welfare Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare, Surajpur, Distt. Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Mohammad Hanish Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare, Rajnandgaon, Revenue And Civil District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 5 - Surendra Kumar Banjare Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare, Rajnandgaon, Revenue And Civil District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 6 - Vinod Kumar Singh Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Surajpur, Distt. Surajpur, Chhattisgarh ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2025.08.25 17:54:42 +0530 2 7 - Kumar Pramod Singh Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistantds Commissioner Tribal Welfare Balrampur, Revenue And Civil District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh 8 - Mohammad Nizamuddin Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Ambikapur, Revenue And Civil Disrict Sarguja, Chhattisgarh 9 - Ashwani Kumar Yadav Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare, Balod, Revenue And Civil District Balod, Chhattisgarh 10 - Amit Kumar Bhatia Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare, Kondagaon, Revenue And Civil District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh 11 - Ashish Kumar Dey Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Kanker, Revenue And Civil Districtr Kanker, Chhattisgarh 12 - Varun Kumar Karan Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Kondagaon, Revenue And Civil District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 13 - Prafful Kumar Gupta Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Dhamtari, Civil And Revenue District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 14 - Jai Govind Gupta Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Ambikapur, Revenue And Civil District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh 15 - Gautam Gahir Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare, Raigarh, Revenue And Civil District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 16 - Vinod Jaiswal Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Surajpur, Revenue And Civil District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 17 - Suraj Prasad Gupta Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare, Balrampur, Revenue And Civil District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 18 - Harish Chandra Nayak Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Jashpur, Revneue And Civil District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 3 19 - Keshri Lal Fafha Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Jagdalpur, Revenue And Civil District Bastar, Chhattisgarh 20 - Harnarayan Khotel Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Korba, Revenue And Civil District Korba, Chhattisgarh 21 - Raghunath Ram Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Ambikapur, Revenue And Civil District Sarguja, Chhattisgarh 22 - Vinay Kumar Gupta Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Balrampur, Revenue And Civil District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh 23 - Smt. Saroj Sao Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Raigarh, Revenue And Civil District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 24 - Mukund Lal Salaam Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare, Kondagaon, Revenue And Civil District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh 25 - Satish Kumar Gritlahare Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Mahasamund, Revenue And Civil District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 26 - Gopal Singh Kanwar Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare, Jagdalpur, Revenue And Civil District Bastar, Chhattisgarh 27 - Narad Kumar Manjhi Posted As Mandal Sanyojak, C/o Office Of Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Sukma, Revenue And Civil District Sukma, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. Navneet Kumar Yadav, Advocate For State / Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Deputy Government Advocate For Respondent Nos. 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 19, 26 and 27 : Mr. Sushil Dubey, Advocate 4 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 25 .0 8 .202 5 1. Heard Mr. Navneet Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, learned Deputy Government Advocate appearing for State / respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Mr. Sushil Dubey, learned counsel, appearing for respondent Nos. 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 19, 26 and 27 on I.A. No.01/2025 is an application for condonation of delay of 294 days in filing the instant appeal. 2. For the reasons mentioned in the application I.A. No.01/2025 i.e. application for condonation of delay, the same is allowed and delay is condoned. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is heard finally. 3. This writ appeal is presented against an order dated 22.08.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No. 1799 of 2015, whereby, the writ petition filed by appellant herein was dismissed by the learned Single Judge. 4. Brief facts of the case projected before the learned Single Judge are that the appellant/writ petitioner and the private respondents were holding the posts of Assistant Teacher and Assistant Grade II & III in the office of the Tribal Welfare Department. An 5 advertisement was issued for appointment to the post of Mandal Sanyojak (Divisional Coordinator/Circle Organizer) from amongst Assistant Teachers and Assistant Grade II & III. The appellant/writ petitioner and the private respondents, along with other eligible aspirants, submitted their applications, and a written departmental examination was conducted on 31.05.2012. The appellant/writ petitioner belonged to the Scheduled Tribe category. Out of 25 posts of Circle Organizer, the cadre was bifurcated into two categories—first, for Assistant Teachers, and second, for Assistant Grade II & III. The appellant/writ petitioner belonged to the Assistant Grade II cadre, in which there were 10 posts in total—6 for General category, 1 for Scheduled Caste category, and 3 for Scheduled Tribe category. 5. After the written examination, the result was declared, and the order of promotion/appointment on the post of Circle Organizer was issued by respondent No. 2/Commissioner, SC & ST Welfare, on 02.06.2012. The appellant/writ petitioner secured 44.5 marks out of 100 in Question Paper No. 1, whereas the required minimum qualifying mark was 50 for all categories, as per the Chhattisgarh Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes Development Subordinate Service Third Class Clerical Recruitment Rules, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as “Rules, 2011”). The appellant/writ petitioner applied for a copy of his answer-sheet and the model answer key under the Right to Information Act, 2005, and the same was furnished by the Public 6 Information Officer on 02.04.2014. Earlier, WPS No. 3616 of 2014 was filed seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to decide his objection, which was disposed of on 04.12.2014. Respondent No. 2, thereafter, rejected the objection raised by the appellant/writ petitioner vide order dated 21.04.2015. 6. Being aggrieved, the appellant/writ petitioner filed WPS No. 1799 of 2015, which came to be dismissed by order dated 22.08.2024. Hence, this writ appeal. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned order dated 22.08.2024 (Annexure A-1) passed by the learned Single Judge is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to law, the same is liable to be set aside. The learned Single Judge failed to consider that the appellant had applied under the Scheduled Caste category but was wrongly treated in the General category, thereby depriving him of reservation benefits. Further, the orders dated 02.06.2012 and 21.04.2015 (Annexures A-2 & A-3) were issued only to extend benefits to private respondents, while the appellant’s candidature was illegally refused. The learned Judge also overlooked the fact that the respondent authorities accepted 49.5 marks as 50 in the case of one Shri Keshri Lal Fafa, while arbitrarily refusing to accept the appellant’s 44.5 as 45, which amounts to discrimination. The departmental examination held on 31.05.2012 suffered from serious procedural irregularities, no publication of eligible and ineligible candidates, no invitation of 7 claims and objections, no proper scrutiny of the model answer, no waiting list, and hurried issuance of result on 02.06.2012 without transparency. Even the model answer was not displayed on the notice board and the appellant had placed before the Court expert opinions from subject teachers, which were not duly appreciated. The entire process thus stands vitiated by arbitrariness, illegality and violation of rules of fairness, and therefore the impugned order deserves to be quashed. The appellant craves leave to urge additional grounds at the time of final hearing. 8. On the other hand, learned State counsel and learned counsel for respondents oppose the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant and submits that the learned Single Judge after considering all the aspects of the matter has rightly dismissed the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner / appellant herein, in which no interference is called for. 9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order and other documents appended with writ appeal. 10. From perusal of the impugned order, it clearly transpires that the learned Single Judge has dismissed WPS No.1799 of 2015 vide order dated 22.08.2024, holding that the appellant/writ petitioner, having failed to secure the minimum qualifying marks as mandated under the Rules, 2011, could not have claimed appointment to the post of Circle Organizer as a matter of right. The learned Single Judge has further observed that the objections 8 raised by the appellant/writ petitioner with regard to the evaluation of his answer sheet were duly considered and examined by the competent authority and rejected by a reasoned order dated 21.04.2015. It was also noted that such matters relating to evaluation of answer sheets and correctness of model answers fall within the domain of an expert body, which has already examined the grievance of the appellant. The learned Single Judge has rightly placed reliance on the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission and another vs. Rahul Singh and another, AIR 2018 SC 2861, wherein it has been categorically held that the Court should exercise great restraint in interfering with the decisions of expert bodies relating to evaluation of examination papers, except in rare cases where mala fides, patent illegality, or perversity are established. 11. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon careful scrutiny of the findings recorded by the learned Single Judge, we are of the considered view that no illegality, perversity, irregularity, or jurisdictional error has been committed by the learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition. The appellant/writ petitioner, admittedly, did not obtain the minimum qualifying marks prescribed under the statutory Rules, 2011, and, therefore, his candidature could not have been considered for appointment. In absence of any statutory violation, mala fide action, or demonstrable arbitrariness, no ground is 9 made out warranting interference in exercise of appellate jurisdiction under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India. The reliance placed by the learned Single Judge on the settled principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court is fully justified and calls for no interference. 12. Consequently, the writ appeal deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed being devoid of merit. There shall be no order as to cost(s). Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu