1 CGHC010191382025 2026:CGHC:38538-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 354 of 2025 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar , Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Respondent No. 1) 2. The Secretary, Panchayat Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar , Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Respondent No. 2) ... Appellant(s) versus 1. Nirmal Kumar Soni S/o Late Binda Prasad Soni Aged About 51 Years R/o Mahalpara Road, Near Durga Mandir Baikunthpur, District - Korea, District Koriya (Baikunthpur) Chhattisgarh, 2. Suresh Prasad S/o Sitaram Aged About 44 Years R/o Domanhill, Prem Nagar, Post - Sonawani Colliery, District - Korea, District Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner No. 2) 3. Chandrabhushan Singh S/o Late Gyanendranath Aged About 59 Years R/o In Front Of Bsnl Office, Jail Road, Surajpur, District - Surajpur, Chhattisgarh, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner No. 3) 4. Jayanth Kumar Sinha S/o Shri P. K. Sinha Aged About 59 Years R/o Jail Road Bahupara, In Front Of Pwd Workshop, Ambikapur District - Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner No. 4) 5. Rajesh Kumar Ambastha S/o Late Shri M.P. Ambastha Aged About 52 Years R/o Kedarpur Near Pahuna Shop Ambikapur, BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2026.09.02 10:44:03 +0530 2 District Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh (Petitioner No. 5) 6. Sanjaydev Acharya S/o Late Shri Falguni Acharya Aged About 52 Years R/o Chandni Chowk Mayapur, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner No. 6) 7. Ramesh Kumar Rai S/o Ramashankar Rai Aged About 44 Years R/o Kedarpur Near Pahuna Shop, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh (Petitioner No. 7) 8. Vinod Kumar Panwar S/o Shri Satyapal Panwar Aged About 50 Years R/o 28/2, Infront Of Hotel Shailgiri, Rawatpara Manendragarh Road, Ambikapur, District Surguja , Chhattisgarh, District Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh (Petitioner No. 8) 9. Smt. Kavita Bansal W/o Shri Ajay Bansal Aged About 42 Years R/o Jaisthamb Chowk. Agrasen Ward. Ambikapur, District - Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh (Petitioner No. 9) 10. Smt. Sudha Hisikar W/o Shri Ramesh Kumar Hisikar Aged About 45 Years R/o Chameli Chowk ,amapara, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner No. 10) 11. Smt. Farida Begum W/o Shri Firoz Khan Aged About 45 Years R/o Patelbadi Gouravpath, Ramsagar Para Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (Petitioner No. 11) 12. K.K. Tiwari S/o Tarachand Tiwari Aged About 52 Years R/o Ramgopal Tiwari Ward No. 1, Pathakpara Mungeli, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh (Petitioner No. 12) 13. Sunil Kumar Pathak S/o Ramji Pathak Aged About 50 Years R/o Ramgopal Tiwari, Ward No. 1 Pathakpara Mungeli District Mungeli. (Petitioner No. 13) 14. Tamesh Sahu S/o Dhanush Sahu Aged About 50 Years R/o Sardarpatel Ward, Behind Manuraj Talkies Mungeli, Chhattisgarh, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner No. 14) 3 15. Vijay Narayan Pandey S/o Shri A.P. Pandey Aged About 52 Years R/o Sargipal Para. Kondagaon, District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner No. 15) 16. Parsuram Namdev S/o Late Shri Halkeyram Namdev Aged About 53 Years R/o Aspatal Ward, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner No. 16) ...Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellants/State : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Additional Advocate General. For Respondents : Mr. Keshav Dewangan, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 01.09.2026 1. Heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State/appellants. Also heard Mr. Keshav Dewangan, learned counsel, appearing for the respondents. 2. Also heard the learned counsel for the parties on I.A. No. 1 of 2025, which is an application for condonation of delay. 3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the reasons mentioned in the application, we are of the considered opinion that sufficient cause has been shown in the application, accordingly, I.A. No. 1 of 2025 is allowed and delay of 1090 days is 4 condoned. 4. The State has filed the instant Writ Appeal challenging therein order dated 30.03.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No. 735 of 2020 (Nirmal Kumar Soni & Others vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Another), whereby, the writ petition preferred by the private respondents/ petitioners has been allowed and the matter was remitted back to the State to take a fresh decision on the claim of the petitioners for appointment on the post of “Lecturer” or in the alternative as “Lab Assistant”. 5. Learned counsel for the State would submit that the issue involved in this writ appeal has already been decided by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No. 227 of 2013 and Writ Appeal No. 242 of 2013, where, relief of regularization of part time teachers on the post of Lecturers and Lab Assistants was denied and Division Bench vide order dated 27.06.2014 held as under :- “7. The notification on which the right has been claimed is merely an administrative instructions. There is no statutory right of regularization. 8. Apart from above, no one has a right to claim regularization over any post. It is a benefit to be conferred by the State Government. The regularization can also not be done unless the posts are available. 9. The State Government has ultimately regularized the Appellants and other similarly situate candidates over the post Shiksha Karmi Grade-III. 10. Considering all the aspects of the matter, the single 5 judge has refused to exercise writ jurisdiction in favour of the Appellants. We see no justification to interfere with the order passed by the Single Judge.” 6. Learned counsel for the State also submits that the issued involved in the present appeal came up for consideration before this Court in an identical writ appeal and the same was dealt by this Court in WA No. 55 of 2023 (State of Chhattisgarh vs. Rajesh Kumar Pathak & Others). 7. Learned counsel for the respondents would not dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the State. 8. Considering the submissions made by rival parties and particularly considering that in Writ Appeal No.227 of 2013 and Writ Appeal No.242 of 2013, this Court has already refused relief of regularization to the similarly situated candidates, we are of the considered view that the order passed by learned Single Judge in WPS No. 735 of 2020 dated 30.03.2022 is not sustainable in the eye of law. Consequently, order dated 30.03.2022 passed in WPS No. 735 of 2018 is hereby set aside and appeal is accordingly allowed. 9. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan