1 2026:CGHC:25356 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5046 of 2018 Chandrabhaskar Singh S/o B.K. Singh Aged About 25 Years R/o Mughdha Parisar, Hanuman Mandir Chowk, Kurud Road, Kohka, Bhilai, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Dairy Federation Limited Through Its Manging Director, Office Urla, Post B.M.Y. District- Durg, Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 2 - Chairman Chhattisgarh State Cooperative Dairy Federation Limited, Office Urla, Post B.M.Y. District- Durg, Chhattisgrh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 3 - Managing Director Chhattisgah State Cooperative Dairy Federation Limited, Office Urla, Post B.M.Y. District- Durg, Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Navoday Singh Thakur, Advocate, holding the brief of Mr. Ramkrishna Kashyap, Advocate For Respondents No.1 to 3 For Intervener(s) : : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Advocate Mr. Neeraj Choubey, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 22/06/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE 2 “10.1) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the petitioner. 10.2) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no.3 to issue appointment order and joining letter in favour of petitioner on the post of Assistant General Manager in respondent no.1 along with all the consequential benefits. 10.3) Any other relief or relief(s) which this Hon'ble Court may think proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner, who is a Post Graduate Diploma Holder in Rural Management from Institute of Rural Management Anand, (IRMA), was selected for appointment to the post of Assistant Junior Manager under respondent No. 1, but till date no order of appointment has been issued. He would further submit that the petitioner meets all the eligibility criteria for appointment to the said post. He would argue that in the campus interview, the petitioner was selected. He would further argue that Ex.P-9 is an internal communication between respondent No. 1 and the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, dated 29.05.2018, wherein the name of the petitioner and other students appeared. He would also submit that the petitioner made a representation before respondent No. 1 on 02.07.2018, but till date no decision has been taken. He would contend that a direction may be issued to respondent No. 1 to decide the representation strictly in accordance with law. 3 3. On the other hand, Mr. Thakur, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No.1 to 3 would submit that the name of the petitioner was considered in the campus selection process, but no select list was ever published, therefore, the petitioner can not claim appointment as a matter of right pursuant to the internal communication dated 29.05.2018. 4. Mr. Choubey, learned counsel appearing for the intervener(s) would support the contention advanced by Mr. Thakur. 5. Heard. 6. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 1 to decide the pending representation in an objective manner, preferably within a period of 150 days. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim