1 CGHC010351782023 2026:CGHC:32275 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8655 of 2023 Amit Kumar Sharma S/o Janardan Sharma Aged About 39 Years R/o House No. 92, Ward No.14 Shriji Colony, Abhanpur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Employment And Training Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Directorate Of Employment And Training Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Block-4, First Floor, Nava Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board (Vyapam) Through Its Secretary, Vyapam Bhavan, North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Vedant Shadangi, Advocate For Respondents 1 & 2/State : Mr. Ashutosh Shukla, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.3 : Ms. Akanksha Singh, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Avinash Singh, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 28.07.2026 1. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following relief(s):- 10.1 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased set-aside/quash the impugned Annexure-P/1 whereby the candidature of petitioner BINI PRADEEP Digitally signed by BINI PRADEEP Date: 2026.07.29 17:37:02 +0530 2 has been declared ineligible for appointment on the post of Training Officer (Computer Operator & Programmign Assistant). 10.2 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the candidature of petitioner eligible & consider the candidature of petitioner for appointment on the post of Training Officer (Computer Operator & Programming Assistant) with all consequential benefits. 10.3 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other writ/writs, order/ orders, relief/reliefs in favour of the petitioners, which the Hon’ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs to the petitioners. 2. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of the Court to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to file fresh better constituted petition. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents have no objection if the prayer of the petitioner is allowed. 4. Having considered the aforesaid prayer of learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty as prayed for. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. 6. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Bini