1 2026:CGHC:18571 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3433 of 2026 1 - Arti Rani Sinha W/o Ramakant Sinha Aged About 34 Years R/o Near Mahi Medical Ambedkar Chowk Dhamtari District- Dhamtari (C.G.) 2 - Dipti Ganjeer W/o Kamlesh Kumar Ganjeer Aged About 32 Years R/o House No 97 Ch Bardebhata Kanker District- Uttar Bastar- Kanker (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Union Of India Through Its Secretary Ministry Of Tribal Affair Rajendra Prasad Road Shastri Bhawan New Delhi 2 - National Education Society For Tribal Students Through Its Commissioner Ministry Of Tribal Affairs Union Of India Ground Floor Gate No -3a Jeevantara Building Parliament Street New Delhi 110001 3 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe Development Department Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar Nava Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Eklavya Vidyalay Sangathan Samiti Through Its Commissioner Cum Secretary Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe Development Department Block- D Ground Floor Inddravati Bhawan Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Petitioners : Mr. Prabhakar Tiwari, Advocate For Respondents No.1, 2 & 4 : Mr. Ramakant Mishra DSGI with Ms. Shweta Rai, Advocate For State/Respondent No.3 : Ms. Shakshi Bajpayee, Panel Lawyer SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2026.04.28 13:14:22 +0530 2 Order on Board 23/04/2026 1. Petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1. That the Hon’ble Court be pleased to call the entire record pertaining to the case of petitioner from the respondent for kind perusal. 10.2. That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to give the petitioners experience due weightage / preference as permissible under the applicable recruitment rules or policy while considering them for re-appointment or engagement. 10.3. Any other relief of relief(s), which this Hon’ble Court may think proper, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted. ” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that case of the petitioner is covered with the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WPS No.7753/2025 and other connected matters decided on 13.02.2026. He contended that in the aforementioned decision the Court has disposed of the writ petition issuing certain directions and therefore, this writ petition may also be disposed of on the similar lines. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent do not dispute the submission of counsel for the petitioner with regard to the decision of writ petitions with similar issues in WPS No.7753/2025 and other connected matters. 3 4. The operative portion of the order dated 13.02.2026 passed in in WPS No.7753/2025 and other connected matters is reproduced below for ready reference : “15. This Court further finds merit in the submission of the respondents that after declaration of EMRS as a Central Sector Scheme, the power to create posts and undertake regular recruitment has been assumed by the Central Government through NESTS, supported by statutory rules, Memorandum of Association, and Memoranda of Understanding executed with the State EMRS Society. Therefore, the contention that the Central Government lacks jurisdiction to issue the impugned advertisement cannot be accepted. 16. Accordingly, this Court holds that the prayer for quashment of the impugned advertisement and for direct regularisation/absorption of the petitioners cannot be granted, as the same would be contrary to the settled principles of service jurisprudence and statutory recruitment framework. However, this Court cannot be oblivious to the fact that the petitioners have served in EMRS institutions for a considerable period, imparting education to tribal students in remote areas. Their experience, familiarity with the EMRS system, and contribution to the functioning of the schools cannot be brushed aside lightly. Though the petitioners do not possess an enforceable legal right to regularisation, equity demands that their experience be given due consideration. It would be unjust to completely ignore the long years of service rendered by them while undertaking regular recruitment. Therefore, while upholding the authority of the Central Government/NESTS to conduct regular recruitment, this Court deems it appropriate to issue a balanced and equitable direction in the interest of justice. 17. Consequently, it is directed that the Central Government as well as the State Government/NESTS shall reconsider the cases of the petitioners, who have served in EMRS institutions for a considerable period, and their experience shall be given due eightage/preference, as permissible under the applicable recruitment rules or policy, while considering them for re- appointment or engagement, subject to fulfillment of eligibility conditions. It is clarified that 4 this Court has not directed regularisation or automatic absorption, but has only directed reconsideration of the petitioners’ cases by giving due importance to their experience, so that the services rendered by them are not rendered meaningless.” 5. As submitted by learned counsel for the respective parties, the case of the petitioner in hand is also similar to facts of the case decided in WPS No.7753/2025 and other connected matters, this writ petition is also disposed of in similar terms. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Ravi Mandavi