1 CGHC010251742019 2026:CGHC:35695 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5837 of 2019 1 - Ku. Santoshi Sidar D/o Ghurau Sidar Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Bhikhampura, Block Baramkela, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Social Welfare, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Police Station- Rakhi, New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Janpad Panchayat Baramkela Through The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Baramkela, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hari Agrawal and Ms. Shalini Kashyap, Advocates For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Sharad Mishra, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, Judge Order on Board 12.08.2026 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner challenging the advertisement issued by respondent No. 2 for appointment to the post of Rozgar Sahayak in 41 Gram Panchayats, vide Annexure P/3, as well as the impugned notice (Annexure P/1), whereby the petitioner has been declared ineligible. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has wrongly been declared ineligible for the post of Rozgar Sahayak solely on the ground that she could not produce the caste certificate and 2 Employment Registration Certificate by the prescribed cut-off date, though the requisite documents were subsequently submitted along with her objection/dawa-apatti. It is, therefore, submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned notice (Annexure P/1), whereby the petitioner has been declared ineligible, as well as the advertisement (Annexure P/3), deserve to be set aside. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has filed its reply, wherein it is stated that respondent No.2/Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, issued an advertisement for appointment to the post of Rozgar Sahayak in 41 Gram Panchayats, wherein the cut-off date for submission of the requisite documents was 27.09.2018. The petitioner had applied for the post of Rozgar Sahayak reserved for the ST (Female) category; however, she was not in possession of a caste certificate issued by the competent authority and an Employment Exchange Registration Certificate on the date of submission of her application. Therefore, having submitted her application without the requisite documents, she was found ineligible for the post of Rozgar Sahayak in terms of Clauses 3 and 8 of the advertisement. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 further submits that after scrutiny of the applications, objections were invited on 24.12.2018 and seven days' time, i.e., up to 01.01.2019, was granted for submitting objections. Thereafter, the objections were considered and the final merit list was forwarded to the Zila Panchayat, Raigarh, for recommendation and was subsequently approved on 25.05.2019. In the final select list issued on 03.06.2019, the petitioner was not selected and, subsequently, vide order dated 12.09.2019, one Nilandari Sidar, D/o Karmu Sidar, was appointed against the post reserved for 3 the Scheduled Tribe category in Gram Panchayat Bhikhampura. It is further submitted that the petitioner has not impleaded the said selected candidate as a party respondent, though she is a necessary party for proper adjudication of the present petition. Since the petitioner submitted the requisite documents only after issuance of the merit list, she was rightly shown in the list of ineligible candidates. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 6. Admittedly, the petitioner has not impleaded the successful candidate, who has been appointed to the post in question vide order dated 12.09.2019, as a party respondent in the present writ petition. The petitioner submitted the requisite documents after issuance of the merit list and, therefore, her name was rightly shown in the list of ineligible candidates. Furthermore, the period of employment as per Annexure P/3 was up to 28.02.2019, though it was extendable, whereas the present writ petition was filed on 23.07.2019. Thus, the writ petition suffers from delay and laches as well as non-joinder of a necessary party. I do not find any merit in the writ petition. Accordingly, the same deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. 7. However, dismissal of this writ petition shall not deter the petitioner from applying for the post of Rozgar Sahayak, if any future vacancy arises, and the same shall be considered in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Jyoti