1 2025:CGHC:45097 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 9739 of 2025 1 - Ajay Ram Rajwade S/o Shri Sohan Ram Aged About 34 Years R/o Village- Sarnapara, Bardhodhi, Surguja, District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Director Directorate of Public Instructions, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Additional Director Directorate Of Higher Education Department, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Principal Govt. R.B.R. N.E.S. P.G. College, Jashpurnagar, District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Govind Prasad Dewangan, Advocate. For State-Respondents : Mr. Keshav Gupta, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 03-09-2025 1. The petitioner has prayed following reliefs in the present writ petition:- “10.1 This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an appropriate order or issue writ and set-aside / quash the impugned order dated 28.07.2025 ( Annexure P/1) issued by Digitally signed by MOHAMMED AADIL KHAN Date: 2025.09.04 11:15:14 +0530 2 the respondent no. 4, in the interest of justice. 10.2 This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an appropriate order or issue writ and direct the respondents to consider and promote the petitioner to the post of Guest Lecturer Grade-II, in the interest of justice. 10.3 This Hon’ble Court may further be pleased to pass an appropriate order or issue writ as deemed fit under the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has obtained C.G. State Eligibility Test (SET) certificate, 2024 and submitted it to respondent No.4 College for upgradation of his qualification in his service record. He would submit that as per clause 6.8 he is entitled for priority and also the enhanced remuneration on the ground of his additional qualification. He would also submit that as per clause 9.5 till the regular posting of the lecturers in the college and if the work of the guest lecturers is found satisfactory no advertisement should be issued for guest lecturers in the college for the same post under which the earlier guest lecturers were working, yet respondent No.4 has issued the advertisement for appointment of guest lecturers in Maths. He would further submit that the petitioner is a Lecturer (Maths) and the advertisement is against the policy of 2024 issued by the State Government and therefore, the advertisement may be quashed. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes and has submitted that as per clause 6.5 of the said policy of 2024 the minimum qualification for the post of guest lecturers have been fixed and as per clause 6.7 of the said policy, the Grade-1 candidates should be given priority. Ph.D. degree holder candidates comes under Grade-I and NET/SET Degree holder candidates comes under Grade-2 and M.Phil. Degree holder of the concerned subject comes under Grade-3. Therefore, if the candidates of Grade-1 would not be available then the candidates of Grade-2 would be considered for guest lecturers in the college. The 3 petitioner claimed that he possessed the SET certificate and therefore, he comes under Grade-2 and his consideration would only after non-availability of Grade-1, therefore, no relief can be granted in the present writ petition to the petitioner. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material annexed with the writ petition. 5. It is not in dispute that by the Policy of 2024 the minimum qualification for guest lecturers have been fixed in which clause 6.5 is provided for qualification of Guest Lecturer/Librarian/and Spots Teacher is as under: “6-5 vfrfFk O;k[;krk@xzaFkiky@dzhM+k vf/kdkjh dh ojh;rk lwph esa izkFkfedrk dze fuEukuqlkj gksxk%& Js.kh& 1 lacaf/kr fo"k; esa Ikh&,p-Mh- Js.kh& 2 usV@lsV ijh{kk mRrh.kZ Js.kh& 3 lacaf/kr fo"k; esa ,e-fQy- /kkjd” Clause 6.7 (1) is also relevant for consideration of the present matter which reads as under: “6-7 fo’ks"k Vhi %& 1- egkfo|ky;@egkfo|ky;ksa esa loZizFke vfrfFk O;k[;krk] vfrfFk xzaFkiky ,oa vfrfFk dzhM+k vf/kdkjh dh O;oLFkk dh tkosxhA Js.kh&1 ds vH;FkhZ ds uke ij loZizFke fopkj fd;k tk,xkA bl Js.kh dk dksbZ vH;FkhZ miyC/k u gks rks dze’k% Js.kh&2 ,oa Js.kh&3 ds vH;FkhZ ds ukeksa ij fopkj fd;k tk,xk A mDr rhuksa Js.kh es vH;FkhZ miyC/k u gksus ij gh vfrfFk f’k{k.k lgk;d] vfrfFk xzaFkiky lgk;d ,oa vfrfFk dzhM+k lgk;d dh O;oLFkk gsrq ’ks"k vH;FkhZ ds ukeksa ij fopkj fd;k tk;sxkA” 6. From the conjoint reading of clause 6.5 and 6.7 of the said policy of 2024 it is quite vivid that the candidates who possesses the Ph.D. degree is to be given priority and it is only when no candidate is available of Grade-1, candidates of Grade-2 is to be considered who is having NET/SET certificates. The claim of the petitioner that he is having SET certificate who can be considered only when the 4 candidates of Grade-1 would not be available. Though, the petitioner has obtained SET certificate and submitted it to the college concerned, the same shall be considered by the college concerned at the time when no candidate of Grade-1 would be available and candidates of Grade-2 would be considered for the post of the guest lecturers in the college. At present only the advertisement has been issued and it cannot be said that no candidate of Grade-I would be available for appointment on the post of guest lecturer for the advertisement dated 28-07-2025. The petitioner is at liberty to apprise the authority concerned about his claim at the time of consideration of Grade-2 candidates as guest lecturer in the college and the authorities concerned is expected to consider the claim of the petitioner as per his qualification which he possesses as on date. 7. With the aforesaid observation the present writ petition is disposed of. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The authorities concerned is at liberty to decide the claim of the petitioner on its own merits. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Aadil