1 2026:CGHC:17843 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1724 of 2026 Kanchan Yadav D/o Bhaiyaram Yadav Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Deosagar, District- Sarangarh Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvyapam) Through Controller Of Ex- amination, Vyapam Bhawan, North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Dis- trict- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Petitioner : Ms. Prachi Singh, Adv. For Respondents : Mr. Avanish Singh, Adv. Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order On Board 20 -4-2026 1 The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :- 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondent to consider the representation of the Petitioner and correct her category from OBC (Creamy Layer) to OВС (Non-Creamy Layer) in the records of TET-2026. AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Digitally signed by AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Date: 2026.04.23 11:03:05 +0530 2 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondent to issue a fresh/revised Eligibility Certificate for TET-2026 in favor of the Petitioner declar- ing her "ELIGIBLE" based on her actual category OBC (Non Creamy Layer) and marks obtained. 10.3 That, any appropriate writ, direction or order may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the petitioner submitted an Online form (Annexure P-1) to appear in the Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) for the year 2026, conducted by the respondents. While filing Online form (Annexure P-1), the petitioner inadvertently mentioned her category as ‘OBC Creamy Lawyer’, but in fact, she belongs to ‘OBC Non-Creamy Lawyer’. She further submits that she has submitted a representation Annexure P-3 on 23-3-2026, despite that, grievance of the petitioner has not been redressed, therefore, she could not qualify the Teachers Eligibility Test. She prays that, this petition may be admitted for hearing. 3 In reply, learned counsel for the respondents would submit that, specific instructions have been issued by the respondents for filing of Online form, according to which, any mistake in Online form can be corrected within 3 days after last date of submitting online form, but she has not done so. He further submits that, similar matter came up before this Court in Writ Appeal No. 770/2024 (Dharmendra Kumar Vs. Chhattisgarh Vyavasyik Pariksha Mandal (CGVyapam and Anr.), wherein vide Judgment dated 21-11-2024, learned Division Bench did 3 not accept the submission of petitioner therein in that regard and the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by that judgment. He further submits that, similar view has also been reiterated by learned Division Bench in Writ Appeal No. 11/2025 (Preeti -v- Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board (Cgvyapam and Anr.), therefore he submits that, this writ petition deserves to be rejected out rightly. 4 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5 As per the instructions issued by the respondents vide Annexure P-1, Clause 2 specifically provides that, correction in the Online form could be done from 1st date after last date of filing of form till 3 days. In the instant case, the petitioner filed representation (Annexure P-3) on 23- 3-2026 for correction, i.e. after declaration of result. In other words, she failed to correct her form within stipulated period. 6 Having considered the aforesaid clear instructions issued by the respondents and in the light of the view taken by learned Division Bench of this Court in afore-cited cases, this Court is not inclined to grant the relief sought for by the petitioner in the instant writ petition. 7 Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed at motion stage. 8 Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge pathak