1 2025:CGHC:1873-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 909 of 2024 Keshar Sahu W/o Dushyant Kumar Sahu Aged About 27 Years R/o House No. 110 Ward No. 8 Trimurty Chowk Mahuda District - Durg (C.G.) ... Appellant(s) versus Chhattisgarh Vyavsayik Pariksha Mandal (CGVYAPAM) Through Exam Controller Vyapam Bhawan North Block Sector - 19 Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur Collector District - Koriya (C.G.) ...Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Ravikar Patel, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Avinash Singh, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 13 . 01 .202 5 1. Heard Mr. Ravikar Patel, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Avinash Singh, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent. 2. The present intra Court appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 14.10.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPC No. 5064 of 2024 (Keshar Sahu vs. Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (CGVYAPAM)), whereby the learned BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.01.13 18:01:01 +0530 2 Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant/writ petitioner herein. 3. It has been pointed out by learned counsel, appearing for the respondent that in an identical matter, this Bench had dismissed WA No.770 of 2024 (Dharmendra Kumar vs. Chhattisgarh Vyavasyik Pariksha Mandal (CGVYAPAM) & Another) vide order dated 21.11.2024 observing as follows : “9. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the writ petitioners / appellant herein observing that the writ petitioner while filling of the online form for appearing in the TET examination 2024, inadvertently in the category (Caste), the petitioner has filled the form as OBC (Creamy Layer). They want to change the form the category as OBC (Non Creamy Layer). Perusal of guidelines which is placed on record by respondents counsel, it is very categorically stated that a details instruction were given before filling of the online form and it is also indicated therein that any correction in online form could have be made till the last date of filling of the form and thereafter within a further period of three days. 8. Having gone through the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge, this Court concurs the findings and observation made by the learned Single Judge in its order which is impugned herein. We do not find any illegality or irregularity in the order under challenge. 9. Accordingly, the writ appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s).” 3 He further submitted that since the facts and issue involved in the present case is identical to that of WA No. 770 of 2024, this appeal may also be dismissed in the same terms. 4. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the materials on record, it is evident that the facts and issue involved in this appeal is identical to WA No. 770 of 2024, this Court deems it appropriate not to take a view other than what has been taken in WA No. 770 of 2024. 5. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed in terms of the order dated 21.11.2024 passed in WA No. 770 of 2024 (Dharmendra Kumar vs. Chhattisgarh Vyavasyik Pariksha Mandal (CGVYAPAM) & Another). Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan