1 2025:CGHC:51443 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2006 of 2023 1 - Khushwant Singh S/o Shri Dikpal Singh Aged About 28 Years R/o Kera Road, Janjgir Champa. 2 - Ravi Kumar Bhurya S/o Ramnath Bhurya Aged About 27 Years R/o Ward No. 13, Ghoda Mandir, Dalli Rajhara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Bihari Salam S/o Shri Kartik Salam Aged About 32 Years R/o High School Road, Near High School Dhekhuna, Uttar Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Chhattisgarh Government Co-Operative Societies Department Through Its Upper Secretary Block 3, Second And Third Floor, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Headquarters Prison And Correctional Services Chhattisgarh Through Its Senior Legal Officer, Near Central Jail, Kacheri Chowk, Jail Rd, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492001 3 - Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission Through Its Uppec Secretary, North Block, Sector 19, Nawa Raipur Atal Nagar Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. P. Acharya, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Vivek Mishra, Panel Lawyer. RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 For Respondent No. 3 : Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 15/10/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record pertaining to the representations submitted by the petitioners and their decision from the respondent-authorities for its perusal. 10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ of the certiorari by quashing the impugned order dated 23.02.2023 (Annexure P/1) issued by the respondent 1. 10.3 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ of mandamus directing respondent no1 to issue an appointment order in favor of petitioners. against the post of Co-operative inspector/co-operative extension. 10.4 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court, may deem fit and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, respondent No. 3 issued a 3 notification dated 27.11.2019 regarding the examination for Provincial Civil Services for Class 2 and Class 3 posts, in which the petitioners participated and managed to secure a place on the waiting list. In this recruitment process, respondent No. 1 had 30 vacant posts for Cooperative Inspector/Cooperative Extension. Meritorious candidates were invited for document verification on 8 and 9 November 2021. After verification, 24 candidates received appointment orders on 12.01.2022, while 6 posts remained vacant due to non-attendance or incomplete documentation. Consequently, respondent No. 1 requested respondent No. 3 on 10.05.2022 to provide a list of eligible candidates from the waiting list to fill the remaining vacancies. Respondent No. 3 replied on 20.05.2022, forwarding the names of 6 eligible candidates, including the petitioners. Subsequently, respondent No. 2 issued a No Objection Certificate in favor of the petitioners on 20.07.2022. On 20.09.2022, respondent No. 1 sought confirmation from respondent No. 3 regarding the validity of the waiting list, to which respondent No. 3 responded on 30.09.2022, confirming its validity along with rules dated 02.05.2019. The petitioners submitted representation letters on 20.10.2022 and 11.01.2023 requesting their appointments, which respondent No. 1 has not yet decided. Aggrieved, the petitioners filed Writ Petition No. WPS/608/2023, and this Hon’ble Court 4 directed respondent No. 1 on 20.01.2023 to consider the petitioners’ applications expeditiously within three weeks. The petitioners subsequently submitted another representation on 27.01.2023. However, respondent No. 1 arbitrarily rejected the petitioners’ representation by order dated 23.02.2023. Hence, this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have applied for the post of Co-operative Inspector/Extension Officer they were duly selected and they were at Serial No. 1 to 3 in the waiting list. He further submits that 6 persons have refused to join the said posts from the selection list as such the petitioners who are at Serial No. 1 to 3 were entitled to be appointed on the basis of selection list of waiting candidates. He further submits that the representation has been made during the currency of waiting list as such the PSC has recommended the name of petitioners to the State Government. It has not been disputed by the State Government that the representation of the petitioners or the recommendation of the PSC has been made out of the currency of the waiting list as such the petitioners are seeking appointment to the aforesaid posts. He has placed reliance upon the judgments passed in WP No. 4792/2020, WP No. 4801/2020, WP No. 4808/2020 and WP No. 6675/2020. 5 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that though the petitioners could not be appointed, however, there is some delay and latches part of the respondent, however, upon query he submits that the representation has been timely moved before the concerned authorities. It has also not been disputed that during the currency of the selection list the PSC has recommended the name of the petitioners. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 submits that the recommendations has been made within time in respect of appointment of the petitioners. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the fact that the petitioners are eligible in all respect and required to be appointed on the vacant post as the vacancy was available during the currency of waiting list and the PSC has also recommended for the appointment of the petitioners, this Court is of the view that the petitioners are entitled for appointment to the post of Co-operative Inspector/Extension Officer. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the order dated 23.2.2023 is hereby quashed. 6 9. The concerned respondent authorities are directed to issue appointment orders in favour of the petitioners in accordance with law within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat