1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7213 of 2022 1 - Rakesh Kumar Dewangan S/o Chandrakumar Dewangan Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Menda Tahsil Dongargarh District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur Raipur District Raiupur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Joint Director School Education Division Rajnandgoan Division Rajanandgaon District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. Apoorva Pandey, Advocate holding the brief of Shri Mateen Siddiqui, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 11.08.2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs:- “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to call the petitioner for the document verification and counseling for appointment on the post of Teacher (Maths) E & T Cadre. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the candidature of the SMT NIRMALA RAO 2 petitioner for appointment on the post of Teacher (Maths) E & T Cadre on the basis of her marks/merit list. 10.3 That, any other order(s)/relief(s)which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award to the costs of the petition may be given.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that pursuant to the advertisement dated 9.3.2019, issued by the Director, Directorate of Public Education/respondent No.2 for the posts of Assistant Teacher/Teacher/Lecturer in various streams, the petitioner submitted his application form for the post of Teacher (Maths). An admit card was issued to the petitioner, and he participated in the written examination conducted on 25.8.2019. He secured 52.394 marks in the examination. Subsequently, the department issued a merit list for the post of Teacher (Maths), in which the name of the petitioner was present, and he was required to appear for document verification and counselling at Jr. Dani Higher Secondary School at Raipur on 18.5.2022. She would further submit that the petitioner was not properly informed by the respondents regarding the document verification and counselling. Later, he made a representation before the respondent authorities seeking permission to participate in the document verification process, but his prayer was turned down. She would pray that a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to consider the name of the petitioner for document verification and counselling, and further, a direction may be issued to consider the name of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Teacher (Maths) E & T Cadre. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He would contend that the information was duly communicated to all the candidates through 3 the online mode. He would contend that despite communication of such information, the petitioner failed to appear on 18.5.2022 at Jr. Dani Higher Secondary School for verification of documents and counselling; therefore, his name was not considered. He would also contend that the selection process was completed in the year 2022 itself, and the petitioner has not arrayed selected/appointed candidates as a party respondent. Hence, the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. Heard counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents present on the record. 5. The petitioner participated in the examination for the post of Teacher (Maths) and secured 52.394 marks. He was required to appear for verification of documents and counselling on 18.5.2022, but failed to do so, despite the fact that the candidates were duly communicated through online mode. As the petitioner could not appear before the authorities, the recruitment process was completed in 2022 itself, and the petitioner has not arrayed selected candidates as party respondents; no case is made out for interference. 6. Accordingly, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi