1 CGHC010369002026 2026:CGHC:44150-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 990 of 2026 Sourabh Nishad S/o Shri Mannu Ram Nishad Aged About 32 Years R/o Gram Sureli, Tehsil Kanker, District - Kanker (C.G.) ... Appellant(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Govt. of Chhattisgarh Department of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Chhattisgarh, Indravati Bhavan, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. Chhattisgarh Staff Selection Board Through Its Chairman/controller, North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, Chhattisgarh ...Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. Tanuj Patwardhan, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Ms. Anuja Sharma, Deputy Government Advocate. For Respondent No. 3 : Dr. Saurabh Kumar Pande, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Krushna Ram Mohapatra , Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Santosh Sharma , Judge Order on Board Per Krushna Ram Mohapatra , Chief Justice 13 .10.2026 1. Heard Mr. Tanuj Patwardhan, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Ms. Anuja Sharma, learned Deputy Government Advocate, BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2026.10.13 17:16:27 +0530 2 appearing for the State/respondents No. 1 & 2, and Dr. Saurabh Kumar Pande, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No. 3. 2. Order dated 31.08.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No. 6373 of 2026 is under challenge in this writ appeal. 3. Learned Single Judge, while dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant, held that the petitioner did not possess the requisite qualification to apply for the post of Teacher in B.Sc. (Agriculture). In view of the observations made in WPS No. 6260 of 2026 (Vishnu Ditya & Others vs. State of Chhattisgarh), referred to by the learned Single Judge, and the observations made by the co-ordinate Bench in WPS No. 3309 of 2024, disposed of vide order dated 05.02.2025, learned counsel for the appellant prays for withdrawal of the writ appeal. 4. Ms. Sharma, learned Deputy Government Advocate, and Dr. Pande, learned counsel, have no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the appellant. 5. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- Sd/- (Santosh Sharma) (Krushna Ram Mohapatra) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan