1 2026:CGHC:15153 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6358 of 2022 1 - Deepak Kumar Kurrey S/o Lakhan Lal Kurrey, Aged About 32 Years R/o Khurghati, Dabhara,, District : Sakti, Chhattisgarh 2 - Rakesh Kumar Jangade, S/o Bharat Das Jangade Aged About 27 Years R/o Ward No. -3, Anand Nagar, Ameri, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhwan, Capital Complex,atal Nagar Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission Through Its Secretary, North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Vaibhav Kumar, S/o Rajesh Kumar Aged About 31 Years R/o Shankar Nagar Doliganj, District Lucknow (Uttar Pradesh) 4 - Ratanesh Kumar, S/o Devraj Singh Aged About 30 Years R/o Village And Post Pilakhatar Jait, District Firojabad (Uttar Pradesh) 5 - Guleshwar Singh, S/o Phool Singh Aged About 28 Years R/o Village And Post Malkot, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 6 - Alok Toppo, S/o Antonish Aged About 32 Years R/o House No. 23, Ward No. 13, Post Line Jashpur, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh NIRMALA RAO 2 7 - Vijay Shankar, S/o Chandraprakash Aged About 34 Years R/o Ward No. 4, Siddhi Vinayak Colony, Behind Little Enzel School, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 8 - Patre Chandresh S/o Omkar Lal Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Kolihapur, Post Tappa, Tahsil Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner/s : Shri Vedant Shadangi, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Anil S. Pandey, G.A. For Respondent No.2 : Shri Anand Mohan Tiwari, Advocate. For Respondent No.5 : Ms. Isha Rajak, Advocate. For Respondent No.8 : Shri Pranav Tiwari, Advocate holding the brief of Shri Shashi Bhushan Tiwari, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 01 .04.2026 1. Learned counsel for the parties submits that the Division Bench of this Court in WPC No.591 of 2012 and other connected matters on 19.09.2022 allowed the writ petition and passed the following orders:- “85. In view of the above discussion, Act of 2011 and Section 3 of Act of 2012, and notification dated 29.11.2012 in rules of 1998 so far as it relates to reservation as indicated in Schedule II Model Roster for districts of Surguja, Surajpur, Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Jashpur, Koria and Surguja Division, are adjudged and declared unconstitutional.” 2. They further submits that order dated 19.09.2022 was subject to challenge before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special leave to Appeal (C) No (s). 18816-18817/2022 (Yogesh Kumar Thakur v. Guru ghashdas Sahtiya Avam Sanskriti Academy and others). The Hon’ble Supreme Court on 01.05.2023 passed the following order:- “4. We, therefore, permit the State to go ahead with the selection process and make appointments and 3 promotions. 5. However, it is made clear that the same shall be subject to the result of the petition. 6. All appointments and promotion orders shall specifically mentions that such appointments and promotions are to the final outcome of the present proceedings.” 3. By virtue of the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court as referred earlier the learned State counsel submits that now the State has taken a decision to proceed with the appointment process. 4. In view of the above, this petition is as of now disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court again if any cause of action survives. 5. Interim order granted earlier is hereby vacated. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi