1 2025:CGHC:8105-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 121 of 2025 Harichand Yadav S/o Kartik Ram Yadav Aged About 33 Years Working As Guest Lecturer (Political Science) at Govt. Laxmaneshwar P.G. College, Kharoud, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through its Secretary Higher Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Additional Director Directorate of Higher Education Department, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3. Principal Govt. Laxmaneshwar P.G. College, Kharoud, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. 4. Mohit Ram Kashyap S/o Lala Ram Aged About 37 Years Guest Lecturer (Sociology) Govt. Laxmaneshwar P.G. College, Kharoud, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ...Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Danish Ahmad Siddiqui, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.02.17 18:07:38 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 17 .02.2025 1. Heard Mr. Danish Ahmed Siddiqui, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State. 2. The present intra Court appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 03.09.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No. 4202 of 2024 (Harichand Yadav & Others vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others), whereby the learned Single Judge has disposed off the writ petition filed by the appellant/writ petitioner herein. 3. It has been pointed out by learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned State counsel that in an identical matter, this Bench had dismissed WA No. 729 of 2024 (Gayatri Sharma vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) vide order dated 08.11.2024 observing as follows : “13. This Court, in Pinky Gupta & Another v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others, {WA No. 620/2024, decided on 27.09.2024}, wherein the order dated 26.06.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No. 8073/2023 and connected matters were disposed of in light of the comprehensive policy 2024 dated 20.06.2024 framed by the State Government (the Higher Education Department) vis-a-vis the engagement of Guest Lecturer(s)/Part Time Lecturer(s), 3 had afÏrmed the order of the learned Single Judge and it was observed that the appointment of Guest Lecturers for the academic session 2024 shall be made strictly in accordance with the policy of 2024. 14. In essence, the appellant/writ petitioner, amongst other reliefs, seeks a relief that she be permitted to continue as Guest Lecturer at Government Dr. Radhabai Naveen Girls College, District Raipur. 15. The appellant/writ petitioner has failed to establish that an ad hoc or temporary appointee cannot be replaced by another ad hoc or temporary appointee and if a temporary appointee in service is incompetent, can he not be allowed to be replaced with a competent or more competent person. There is no reason why the competent person cannot be appointed in place of the incompetent person, when both the appointments are ad hoc or temporary in nature. 16. In the present case, the appellant/writ petitioner is also a Guest Lecturer which is a temporary arrangement for one academic session. If the State has come up with a new Policy of 2024 which is in conformity with the UGC guidelines and better candidates would be available for the said posts, it cannot be said to be arbitrary or unreasonable if the State decides to advertise those posts and appoint fresh Guest Lecturers having better and higher qualifications in comparison to the existing ones with lesser qualification. Even otherwise, it is a settled position of law that the Courts cannot interfere with the soundness and wisdom of a policy. A policy is subject to judicial review on the limited grounds of compliance with the fundamental rights and other provisions of the Constitution. The Policy of 2024 would definitely be in the larger interest of the students. 4 17. We are totally in agreement with the reasons and observations of the learned Single Judge which is just and proper warranting no interference. No relief(s) as sought for by the appellant/writ petitioner can be granted in this appeal as it is for the State to decide what would be the best in the interest of the institution and the students. Even otherwise, the learned Single Judge has made it clear that the appellant/writ petitioner shall not be replaced by similar set of Guest Lecturer having similar qualification as the appellant is having and to that extent, the rights and interest of the appellant/writ petitioner remains secure. 18. As a result, this appeal stands dismissed.” They further submitted that since the facts and issue involved in the present case is identical to that of WA No. 729 of 2024, this appeal may also be disposed off 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. 729 of 2024, this Court deems it appropriate not to take a view other than what has been taken in WA No. 729 of 2024. 5. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed in terms of the order dated 08.11.2024 passed in WA No. 729 of 2024 (Gayatri Sharma vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others). Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan