1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3140 of 2015 1 - Smt. Dileshwari W/o Anujram Gada, Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Parsada Khurd, Block Chhura, Post Chhura, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - Commissioner, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh, District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh 4 - Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Chhura, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh, District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh 5 - The Development Officer, Akikrit Bal Vikas Priyojna, Chhura, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh, District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh 6 - Smt. Om Bai Gada W/o Shri Mohan Gada, R/o Village Parsada, Khurd, Block Chhura, Post Chhura, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh, District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Renu Kochar, Advocate For State / Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 : Mr. Aman Tamboli, PL For Respondent No. 6 : Ms. Prachi Singh, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order on Board 28/01/2025 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner claiming following reliefs : 2 I. That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to produce the entire record of the case for kind perusal of the Hon’ble Court. ii. That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issued a writ in the nature of certiorari and quashed order dated 29.07.2015 (Annexure P-1) in the interest of justice. iii. That this Hon’ble Court may be further pleased to pass any other consequential and other orders/writs which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. iv. That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to pay cost of petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an advertisement was issued by the respondents authorities inviting application to fill up vacant post of Angan Badi Assistant of Gram Panchayat Parsada Block Chhura, District Gariyaband, CG. The petitioner and the respondent No. 6 made their applications for appointment on the said post. The last date for submission of the application form was 25.05.2012. Thereafter, objections were invited by the respondent authorities as the petitioner belongs to schedule caste category, by an application dated 20.09.2012, a caste certificate was submitted by her during the period of invitation to objection. The Janpad Panchayat, Chhura also passed the resolution that the assessment of the application invited on the set of Angan Badi Assistant shall be made after receiving the objections and certificate in this regard. Thereafter, the petitioner was appointed by respondent No. 4 on the post of Angan Badi Assistant vide order dated 04.01.2013 (Annexure P-2). The said order was subjected to challenge by respondent No. 6 before the Collector, District Gariyaband. Vide its order dated 23.07.2014, the Collector allowed the appeal filed by respondent No. 6 and the appointment of the petitioner was set aside and respondent No. 6 was directed to be appointed on the post of Angan Badi Assistant at Village Parsada Khurd. Against which a revision was preferred by the petitioner before the Commissioner Raipur Division Raipur, CG who also dismissed the revision and affirmed the order of the Collector vide its order dated 29.07.2015 which is assailed before this Court in this writ petition. She further submits that the petitioner belongs to schedule caste category and till the last date of filing of the application dated 25.05.2012, the petitioner was not in possession of the caste certificate. The caste certificate was obtained by her and submitted along with the application during the course of invitation of objections. She submits that the 3 appointment of the petitioner was made in light of the resolution passed and also that the caste certificate was submitted by her during the period of inviting objections, the learned Collector as well as Commissioner committed an error of law and fact by allowing the appeal of the respondent No. 6 and dismissing the revision of the petitioner. She submits that no prejudice would be caused to respondent No. 6 as the caste certificate of the petitioner was not objected by respondent No. 6. Therefore, she submits that the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Annexure P-1) and Collector (Annexure P-7) may be set aside and the petitioner may be appointed on the post of Angan Badi Assistant at Village Parsada Khurd, District Gariyaband, CG. 3. Per contra, Mr. Tamboli submits that the dispute is between the petitioner and the respondent No. 6 and as such the Collector and the Commissioner have exercised their quasi judicial function and they have passed a speaking order considering the relevant material placed before them. Therefore, no interference is warranted. 4. Ms. Prachi Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No. 6 submits that as per the advertisement issued though it is not filed along with the writ petition, a condition was put by which it was made clear to the aspiring candidates to submit all the relevant documents along with their application on or before the last date of submission and no certificate would be entertained at the time of inviting objections and no marks would be provided at their strengths. Even otherwise, the copy of the caste certificate appended with the writ petition clearly shows that it is prepared after the last date of submission of the application. Therefore, considering this aspect of the matter, the Collector and the Commissioner have rightly passed the order dated 23.07.2014 and 29.07.2015. The petition has no merits and is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 6. For the reasons best known to the petitioner, the advertisement inviting application for appointment on the post of Angan Badi Assistant, has not been placed on record. From perusal of order dated 23.07.2014 (Annexure P-7) passed by the Collector it appears that an advertisement was issued by the office of Project Officer Integrated Child Development, Chhura dated 11.05.2012 and clause No. 6 of which indicates that during the course of 4 inviting the objections (Dava Apatti) no certificate would be accepted which provides for grant of additional marks. All the certificates are required to be appended with the application form. The order also reflects that when the initial assessment was made for preparation of the merit list, the petitioner obtained 39 marks whereas the respondent No. 6 obtained 47.60 marks and stood first in the merit list and the petitioner stood second in the merit list. It appears that during the course of inviting objection (Dava Apatti) a certificate was filed, by which the petitioner was awarded ten more marks and an appointment order was issued in his favour. The emphasis has been laid down on the resolution passed by the Janpad Panchayat but it has not been reflected from the record as to whether the Janpad Panchayat has issued advertisement and whether the conditions prescribed in the advertisement can be relaxed by resolution of Janpad Panchayat. The Collector gave a categorical finding that no certificate which would lead to award of additional marks would be considered at the time of inviting objections (Dava Apatti) and all the certificate has to be submitted at the time of filing of the form as per the conditions of the advertisement. This finding of fact has been affirmed by the Commissioner in the revision filed by the petitioner. The finding of fact does not appear to be perverse or contrary to the record. The caste certificate of the petitioner filed along with the petition is of 19.09.2012 apparently after last date of filing of the application form. Therefore, on due consideration, this court does not find any merits in the writ petition. In view of above discussion, this writ petition fails and is dismissed. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) JUDGE Pawan