1 CGHC010330662026 2026:CGHC:38709 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6391 of 2026 1 - Himanshu Rajput S/o Basant Singh Rajput Aged About 30 Years R/o House No. 61, Bithaldah, P.S. Lormi, District- Mungeli, (C.G.) 2 - Nisha Vaishnav D/o Hargovind Vaishnav Aged About 28 Years R/o House No. 56, Kailash Nagar, Near Daihan, Ward No. 3, Kawardha, P.S.- Kawardha, District- Kawardha, (C.G.) 3 - Nilesh Singh Rajput S/o Shudhanva Rajput Aged About 28 Years R/o Village- Jhaphal, P.S. Lormi, District- Mungeli, (C.G.) 4 - Raghuveer Singh Rajput S/o Sher Singh Rajput Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Jhaphal, P.S. Lormi, District- Mungeli, (C.G.) 5 - Devshankar Rajput S/o Sudardhan Rajput Aged About 26 Years R/o Village- Bhaorakachhar, P.S. Takhatpur, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) 6 - Ashutosh Sahu S/o Krishna Kumar Sahu Aged About 28 Years R/o House No. 7, Stap Dem Gali, Endruz Ward, Mungeli, P.S. Mungeli, District- Mungeli (C.G.) 7 - Mahesh Kesharwani S/o Sunil Kesharwani Aged About 26 Years R/o Near Satya Narayan Ram Mandir, Gandhi Ward No. 9, Mungeli, P.S. Mungeli, District- Mungeli, (C.G.) 8 - Devendra Singh S/o Gopi Singh Aged About 25 Years R/o 154, Bilaspur Road, Ramhepur, Ward No. 15, P.S. Lormi, District- Mungeli, (C.G.) 9 - Naveen Rajput S/o Rambhakt Singh Rajput Aged About 24 Years R/o Main Road, Near Pool, Ward No. 6, Lormi, P.S. Lormi, District- Mungeli, (C.G.) RAHUL JHA Digitally signed by RAHUL JHA Date: 2026.09.02 10:29:21 +0530 2 10 - Suman Pandey D/o Anil Pande Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Kheda, P.S. Mungeli, District- Mungeli, (C.G.) 11 - Saraswati Patel D/o Pravesh Patel Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Sondiha, Bartikala, P.S. Chandaura, District- Surajpur, (C.G.) Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District-Raipur, (C.G.) 2 - Directorate Of Public Instruction Through Director, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur, (C.G.) 3 - Chhattisgarh Staff Selection Board (Formaly-C G V Y A P A M) Through Its Chairperson, Vyapam Bhawan, North Block, Section- 19, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, (C.G.) 4 - Exam Controller, Chhattisgarh Staff Selection Board (Formerly- C G V Y A P A M ), Vyapam Bhawan, North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, (C.G.) Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Leekesh Kumar, Advocate For Resp/State : Mr. Gary Mukhopadhaya, Addl. Advocate General For Resp. No. 3 & 4 : Mr. Avinash Singh, Advocate (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 01/09/2026 1. The instant Writ Petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an in appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent authorities to permit the petitioners who otherwise fulfil the 3 eligibility conditions for the post of Teacher (Agriculture), to participate the ongoing recruitment process notwithstanding their presently not possessing the qualification of B.Ed., by granting them a one-time transitional relaxation in respect of the said qualification. 10.2 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to accept and process the applications of the petitioners for the post of Teacher (Agriculture) and permit them to appear in the recruitment examination, subject to the condition that the petitioners shall acquire the prescribed B.Ed. qualification within a reasonable period prescribed by this Hon'ble Court or the respondent authorities, and subject to such further conditions as may be deemed fit and proper. 10.3 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct that the petitioners, if otherwise found successful and selected in the recruitment process, shall not be denied appointment solely on the ground of not possessing the B.Ed. qualification as on the last date of submission of the application, provided that they acquire and produce The requisite B.Ed. qualification within the period prescribed by this Hon'ble Court or the respondent authorities. 10.4 That, in alternative this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned advertisement issued in August 2026 to the extent for the post of Teacher (Agriculture) E-Cadre and T-Cadre. (Annexure P/1). 10.5 That, this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to pass such further orders or directions as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a B.SC (Agriculture) graduate and is presently pursuing B.Ed degree and seeks 4 permission to participate provisionally in the recruitment process for Teacher (Agriculture). 3. Learned counsel for the State submits that the issue involved in this writ petition has already been considered and decided by this Court vide judgment dated 20.08.2026 passed in WPS No. 6260 of 2026 (Vishnu Ditya & Ors. vs. State of Chhattisgarh), wherein this Court has held as under:- “6. It is not the case of the petitioners that the requirement of B.Ed. qualification prescribed for the post is itself illegal or that the State Government lacks the authority to prescribe such qualification. Their grievance is confined to seeking a one-time transitional relaxation on the ground that they were eligible under the earlier regime and could not acquire the B.Ed. qualification within the short period preceding the present recruitment process. 7. However, once the earlier exemption from the prescribed qualification has been declared unconstitutional and the State Government has been directed to prescribe B.Ed. qualification in accordance with the NCTE Regulations, 2014, the petitioners cannot claim a right to participate in the recruitment process without possessing the qualification prescribed under the prevailing Rules. Granting such relaxation by judicial order would, in effect, amount to creating an exception to the qualification which has been prescribed pursuant to the aforesaid order of the Division Bench. 8. It is the well settled proposition of law that fixing eligibility criteria, minimum qualifications, and service rules belongs strictly to the rule-making authority or the State Government and the Courts cannot substitute their own views or waive mandatory job criteria to accommodate individual candidates. Writ jurisdiction 5 under Article 226 only examines if the decision-making process is arbitrary, mala fide, or unconstitutional, rather than relaxing standard qualifications. 9. In view of the aforesaid legal position and considering the binding nature of the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in Ashokanand Patel (Supra), this Court is not inclined to grant the one-time transitional relaxation sought by the petitioners. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition sans merit, deserves to be and is hereby dismissed at the motion stage itself.” 4. Learned State counsel further submits that since the facts and issue involved in the present case is identical to that of WPS No. 6260 of 2026, this petition may also be dismissed in the same terms. 5. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the materials available on record, it is evident that the facts and issue involved in this petition is identical to WPS No. 6260 of 2026 this Court deems it appropriate not to take a view other than what has been taken in the aforesaid writ petition. 6. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed in terms of the order dated 20.08.2026 passed in WPS No. 6260 of 2026. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE Rahul