1 2026:CGHC:9439-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 168 of 2026 1 - Prachi Gupta D/o Shri Saheb Ram Gupta Aged About 19 Years R/o Bich Basti, Kukurda, Raigarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 2 - Dipti Kumari D/o Lavkush Gupta Aged About 18 Years R/o Lotan Chal, Raigarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 3 - Bhawana Sahu D/o Dilip Sahu Aged About 18 Years R/o House No. 137, Bhagirithi Para, Kapsida, Uchbhitti, Sarangarh, District - Sarangarh - Bilaigarh (C.G.) 4 - Roshini Gupta D/o Suresh Gupta Aged About 18 Years R/o Darridih, Tehsil Dharamjaigarh, P.O. Ongana, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 5 - Bhavani Malakar D/o Dinesh Malakar Aged About 18 Years R/o Gondpara, Netnagar, P.O. Netnagar, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 6 - Kashish Dewangan D/o Shravan Kumar Dewangan Aged About 20 Years R/o House No. 52, Koshta Para, Tarpali, P.O. - Boirdadar, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 7 - Ankit Kuswaha S/o Paras Singh Kuswaha Aged About 19 Years R/o Shekhpur, Saidpur, Ghazipur (Uttar Pradesh) – 233304 8 - Radhika Bhagat D/o Balak Ram Bhagat Aged About 18 Years R/o House No. 82, Ward No. 12, Uttar Regaon, P.O. Dolsara, District - Raigarh (C.G.) – 496017 9 - Shraddha Soreng D/o Ramsagar Soreng Aged About 18 Years R/o Jambahar, Jashpur, District - Jashpur (C.G.) 496227 10 - Ankita Bhagat D/o Bhogsingh Bhagat Aged About 18 Years R/o - Dithori Ama, Jambahar, Laillunga, District - Raigarh (C.G.) – 496113 MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2026.02.24 16:33:00 +0530 2 11 - Manisha Mahant D/o Mukesh Kumar Mahant Aged About 19 Years R/o House No. 42, Ward No. 10, Katharrapali, P.O. Singhitarai, District - Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) 495695 12 - Ishwar Kumar Jaiswal S/o Dinesh Kumar Jaiswal Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Sukli, Tehsil Lalpur, District - Mungeli (C.G.) 13 - Shabnam Marar D/o Rajendra Kumar Aged About 18 Years R/o Duli Kacchar, Jawai, Korba, District - Korba (C.G.) 14 - Sonam Bhagat D/o Baijnath Bhagat Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Farsabahar, Tehsil Farsabahar, District Jashpur (C.G.) 15 - Sheelu Dhurvey D/o Ramchandra Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Pendra, Tehsil Pendra, District - Gaurella - Pendra - Marwahi (C.G.) ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary To The Govt. Of Chhattisgarh, Department Of Medical Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, P.S. Rakhi, Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Commissioner Directorate Of Medical Education, Swasthya Bhawan, North Block, Second Floor, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - The Director Directorate Of Medical Education, Swasthya Bhawan, North Block, Second Floor, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - The Chairman Counselling Committee, Directorate Of Medical Education, Swasthya Bhawan, North Block, Second Floor, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh 5 - Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board Through Controller Of Examination, Vyapam Bhawan, North Block, Section - 19, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur 6 - Indian Nursing Council Through It's Secretary, Address - 8th Floor, N B C C Center, Plot No. 2, Community Center Okhla Phase-I, New Delhi - 110020 ... Respondent(s) 3 For Appellant(s) : Mr. Aditya Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Add. A.G., Mr. Ramakant Mishra, DSGI, Ms. Akansha Singh, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 24.02.2026 1. Heard Mr. Aditya Agrawal, learned counsel for appellants. Also heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General for respondent / State, Mr. Ramakant Mishra, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India for Union of India and Ms. Akansha Singh, learned counsel for respective respondents. 2. The appellants have filed this writ appeal against an order dated 13.01.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPC No. 112/2026 (Prachi Gupta Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others), by which the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner / appellants herein. 3. It has been pointed out by learned counsel, appearing for the appellant as well as learned counsel appearing for the respondents that in an identical matter, this Bench had dismissed WA No. 169/2026 (Sabina Ekka vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) vide order dated 20.02.2026, observing as follows : 4 “7 The undisputed position is that the last date for admission to the first year B.Sc. Nursing Course was fixed as 31.12.2025 in terms of the notified academic schedule. The appellants approached the learned Single Judge seeking extension of the said cut-off date on the ground that the qualifying percentile was reduced on 29.12.2025, leaving insufficient time to secure admission. The learned Single Judge declined to grant the relief, and we find no infirmity in the said view. 8 It is well settled that the admission schedule for professional courses must be adhered to strictly and cannot ordinarily be altered by judicial intervention. The cut-off date is fixed to maintain certainty, uniformity and discipline in the academic calendar. Once the prescribed date has expired, issuance of directions to reopen or extend the counselling process would lead to administrative uncertainty and may adversely affect the academic session. The power under Article 226, though wide, is to be exercised in accordance with settled principles and not in a manner that disturbs the statutory framework governing admissions. 9 The reliance placed by the appellants on the reduction of percentile by the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences in relation to NEET PG-2025 does not advance their case, as the said decision pertains to a distinct course governed by a separate regulatory regime. No automatic parity can be claimed for B.Sc. Nursing admissions on that basis. Likewise, extension of timelines by another State Government cannot create an enforceable right in 5 favour of the appellants in the absence of a similar policy decision by the competent authority in the present case. 10 We also find that the regulatory framework governing the nursing course prescribes a structured academic calendar. The categorization into Regular and Irregular Batches cannot be construed as conferring an unrestricted power to grant admissions beyond the notified deadline. The appellants participated in the admission process with full knowledge of the stipulated schedule and cannot, after expiry of the cut-off date, seek extension as a matter of right. 11 The learned Single Judge has exercised discretion judiciously and in consonance with settled principles of law. We find no arbitrariness, illegality or perversity in the impugned order warranting interference in intra- court appeal. 12 Accordingly, the appeal being devoid of merit, stands dismissed. No order as to costs.” They further submit that since the facts and issue involved in the present case is identical to that of WA No. 169/2026, 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. 169/2026, this Court deems it appropriate not to take a view other than what has been taken in WA No.169/2026. 6 5. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed in terms of the order dated 20.02.2026 passed in WA No. 169/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Manpreet