Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6409 (CHH)

NEELIMA NAIK v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/8596/2022 · 2026-04-14

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:17235 NAFR HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8596 of 2022 Neelima Naik W/o Shri Santosh Naik Aged About 40 Years R/o House No. 43, Jainam Vihar Colony, Pachpedi Naka, Lalpur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of General Administration, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur (C.G.). 2 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Medical Education (Ayush), Health And Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 3 - Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission Through Its Secretary, North Block, Sector-19, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.). 4 - Dr. Shyamvati Bhagat W/o Shri Baleshwar Bhagat, R/o Ward No. 10, Kundur Bihari, Post Navapara, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh), Presently Posted At Community Health Center Sonhat, District Koriya (Chhattisgarh). 5 - Dr. Kuldeep Kumar Dhruv R/o Ward No. 12, Gayatri Mandir, Tahsil Sahaspur Lohara, District Kabirdham (Chhattisgarh), Presently Posted At Primary Health Center Amabeda, District Kanker (Chhattisgarh). ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate, holding the brief of Mr. Bhupendra Shriwas, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amandeep Singh, Panel Lawyer Mr. Anand Mohan Tiwari, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 15/04/2026 2 1. Learned counsel for the parties submits that the Division Bench of this Court in WPC No.591 of 2012 and other connected matters on 19.09.2022 allowed the writ petition and passed the following orders:- “85. In view of the above discussion, Act of 2011 and Section 3 of Act of 2012, and notification dated 29.11.2012 in rules of 1998 so far as it relates to reservation as indicated in Schedule II Model Roster for districts of Surguja, Surajpur, Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Jashpur, Koria and Surguja Division, are adjudged and declared unconstitutional.” 2. They further submits that order dated 19.09.2022 was subject to challenge before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special leave to Appeal (C) No (s). 18816-18817/2022 (Yogesh Kumar Thakur v. Guru ghashdas Sahtiya Avam Sanskriti Academy and others). The Hon’ble Supreme Court on 01.05.2023 passed the following order:- “4. We, therefore, permit the State to go ahead with the selection process and make appointments and promotions. 5. However, it is made clear that the same shall be subject to the result of the petition. 6. All appointments and promotion orders shall specifically mentions that such appointments and promotions are to the final outcome of the present proceedings.” 3. By virtue of the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court as referred earlier the learned State counsel submits that now the State has taken a decision to proceed with the appointment process. 3 4. In view of the above, this petition is as of now disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court again if any cause of action survives. 5. Interim order granted earlier is hereby vacated. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim