1 / 6 2026:CGHC:5214 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 13701 of 2025 1 - Deepak Kumar S/o Ambe Lal Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Jhatpathar P.O. And Tahsil Biharpur, District- Surajpur (C.G.) 2 - Rahul Singh S/o Jai Prakash Singh Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Puta P.O. Katkona District- Koriya (C.G.) 3 - Nageshwar Singh S/o Suresh Singh Aged About 38 Years R/o Village And P.O. Patna District- Koriya (C.G.) 4 - Uday Prakash Bhagat S/o Pawan Sai Aged About 38 Years R/o Village And P.O. Sarbhoka P.S. Patna District- Koriya (C.G.) 5 - Rita Kushwaha W/o Vishnu Kushwaha Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Chhindiya P.O. Patna District- Koriya (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Ministry At Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date: 2026.02.07 17:29:10 +0530 2 / 6 2 - Commissioner Medical Education Department, North Block Sector- 19 Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Dean Rajmata Smt. Devendra Kumari Singhdev Govt. Medical College Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) 4 - Joint Director And Hospital Superintendent Rajmata Smt. Devendra Kumari Singhdev Govt. Medical College Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Pushkar Sinha, Advocate For State : Mr. Mayur Khandelwal, Panel Lawyer S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 30/01/2026 1. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this case is heard finally. 2. Petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs: 10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to call the entire records pertaining to this case. 10.2 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ in the nature of certiorari/ prohibition / mandamus, thereby to set aside the impugned advertisement cancellation notice dated 18-09-2025 (Annexure P/1) after declaring it unconstitutional, illegal and arbitrary. 10.3 The Hon'ble court may kindly further be pleased to direct the authorities to restore the impact/position of questioned advertisement dated 20-07-2022 to the level/stage it was existing prior to issuing impugned advertisement cancellation notice dated 18-09-2025. 3 / 6 10.4 The Hon'ble court may kindly further be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to decide the pending representation of the petitioners, in accordance with law with valid and lawful reason within stipulated time period, and further to pass any other relief(s) which it deems fit along with cost of the petition in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners being unemployed persons had applied for appointment on different posts under Govt. Medical College, Ambikapur pursuant to advertisement dated 18.09.2025 issued for the candidates belonging to Sarguja Division. Despite lapse of a considerable period of time, respondent authorities failed to conduct any recruitment process whatsoever. Thereafter, without assigning any cogent or justifiable reasons, respondent authority arbitrarily cancelled the said advertisement. On the other hand similar recruitment proceeding initiated by Govt. Medical College Kanker has been promptly completed, candidates were selected and they were given appointment also. The petitioners, being unemployed persons, had a legitimate expectation that the recruitment process would be completed in a fair and timely manner. He contends that the respondents cannot be permitted to keep the recruitment process in abeyance for years and thereafter cancel the advertisement at their whim. Therefore, impugned cancellation order of advertisement deserves to be quashed and the respondents be directed to proceed with the recruitment process in accordance with law. 4 / 6 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent-State opposes submission of learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that, competent authority has decided to cancel the said advertisement and entrust the entire recruitment process to Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board in the interest of fair recruitment process and sound administration. This decision has been taken after due consideration, with the objective of streamlining the recruitment process and ensuring greater transparency in the selection process. No prejudice is caused to the petitioners in cancellation of said advertisement. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents annexed along with writ petitioner. 6. Annexure P-1 is the impugned notice whereby entire recruitment proceeding initiated by respondents has been cancelled. Operative portion of order Annexure P-1 is reproduced herein under: / विሺኋपन विनरस्तीकरण सूचन // छቈኍसगढ़ शा सन, स्वा ቝኚय एवा परिवा  कल्य ण विवाभा ग, नय  यप क प्ቔ ्ቅाሰ क एफ 12-28/2013/न/55-दो!. दिदोन क 25 सिसतम्ब 2013 क ቛኋ  शा सक(य सि)विकत्स ाሰहा विवाቕኋ लय तथा सब्ቍ सि)विकत्स लय अቚኌम्बक प, जि3ल - सग3 छ० ग० हात स5जि3त विवाभिभा्ቐ त5तय एवा )तथा8 ቦኔण क पदो: प न) दोቦኌशा<त विवावाण अनस  विवाሺኋ पन 3  विकय गय था । ाሰ ननय ाሰ्ቔ 3, ቝኋ ቝኚय एवा परिवा  कल्य ण तथा सि)विकत्स सिशाቌኋ विवाभा ग, छ०ग० शा सन क( अध्यቌኋत ाሰB  3ाሰ त ቦኔाሰत दोवान््ቖ क ाሰ  िሺस<हादोवा शा सक(य सि)विकत्स ाሰहा विवाቕኋ लय एवा सब्ቍ सि)विकत्स लय, अቚኌम्बक प, सग3 छ०ग० क स ाሰ न्य सभा (स्वाशा स समिाሰवित) क( आहूत बIठक दिदोन Kक 23.04.2025 ाሰB उक्त विवाሺኋ पन क! विनस्त क 5 / 6 ቤኋ पाሰ स भान हात विनदोOशा ቚኋ प्त हुए हाS, जि3सक परिप लन ाሰB उक्त विवाሺኋ पन क! एतदोT ቛኋ  विनस्त विकय 3 त हाI।" 7. Perusal of contents of impugned notice shows that decision to cancel advertisement and to fill the vacancies through Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board was taken on the basis of direction issued by the General Body meeting (Autonomous) of Govt. Medical College, Ambikapur convened on 23.04.2025. 8. Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Employees State Insurance Corporation & Anr. Vs. Dr. Vinay Kumar & Ors. [2022 LiveLaw (SC) 514], while dealing with the issue of legal rights of a candidate who has submitted candidature for direct recruitment, held as under: “(6) The cardinal principle we must bear in mind is that this is a case of direct recruitment. A candidate who has applied does not have a legal right to insist that the recruitment process set in motion be carried to its logical end. Even inclusion of a candidate in the select list may not clothe the candidate with such a right. This is, however, different, no doubt, from holding that the employer is free to act in an arbitrary manner.”….. 9. In the case at hand, learned counsel for the petitioners failed to place on record any material whatsoever that the decision of cancellation of advertisement has been taken arbitrarily or it is malafide. Decision to entrust the recruitment process to an independent expert agency can be taken with an object of ensuring institutional integrity, objectivity, and professional competence in the selection process. The said decision falls squarely within the domain of 6 / 6 administrative policy, and the writ Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction, would not ordinarily interfere with such policy decision unless they are shown to be arbitrary, discriminatory, or actuated by malice, which is conspicuously absent in the present case. No vested or accrued right is created in favour of petitioners merely by issuance of an advertisement by respondent and participation of petitioners in a selection process. Further, cancellation of advertisement applies equally to all candidates without singling out any individual or class. Therefore, no prejudice has been caused to the petitioners, and the challenge raised is premature and misconceived. It is well settled law that the employer retains the authority to cancel a recruitment process prior to final selection, provided the decision is not arbitrary or malafide. 10. For the foregoing discussions, facts of case, decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, I do not find any merit in this writ petition. Writ petition is liable to be and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Praveen