Chattisgarh High Court
Praveen Shyam Gupta vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 6 August, 2021
1
WA No.213 of 2021
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WA No.213 of 2021
1. Praveen Shyam Gupta, S/o Suraj Prasad Gupta, Aged About
29 Years R/o Kedarpur, Police Station Kotwali, Ambikapur,
District Sarguja Chhattisgarh.
---- Appellant
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department Of
Public Works, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur,
Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.
2. Engineer In Chief, Department Of Public Works,
Chhattisgarh, Raipur Chhattisgarh.
3. Collector, Ambikapur, Surguja Chhattisgarh.
4. Chief Engineer, Department Of Public Works, Ambikapur,
Sarguja Chhattisgarh.
5. Superintending Engineer, Department Of Public Works,
Ambikapur Division, Ambikapur, Sarguja Chhattisgarh.
6. Sumit Kumar Tiwari, S/o Late Shri Markenday Tiwari, R/o
Uttari Ring Road, Kedarpur, Near Jaiswal Cement Pipe
Factory, Ambikapur, Sarguja Chhattisgarh.
7. Sushil Kumar Sharma, S/o Gopal Sharma, R/o Near Petrol
Pump, Main Road, Rajpur, District Balrampur - Ramanujganj
Chhattisgarh.
8. Tuleshwar Singh, S/o Ramchandra, R/o Village Harra Tikra,
Post Jai Nagar, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondents
For Appellant : Shri C.J.K. Rao, Advocate
For Respondent/State : Shri Chandresh Shrivastava, Dy.
Advocate General
2
WA No.213 of 2021
(Proceedings through Video Conferencing)
Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, Ag. CJ
Hon'ble Shri N.K. Chandravanshi, J.
Judgment on Board
By
Prashant Kumar Mishra, Ag. CJ.
06-08-2021
I.A.No.1
This an application for condonation of delay.
For the reasons mentioned in the application (I.A.No.1) the
same is allowed and the delay of 824 days in filing the writ
appeal is condoned.
1. Heard on admission.
2. Challenge in the writ petition before the learned Single Judge
was to the appointment of the respondents No.6 to 8 on the
post of Time Keeper as a result of direct recruitment on the
said post.
3. Challenge was thrown on the ground that the appellant
(henceforth 'the petitioner') has also passed his Higher
Secondary School Certificate Examination with Mathematics
as one of the subject and has secured more marks in the
Higher Secondary School Certificate Examination, therefore,
he should have been preferred for selection on the subject
post over and above the private respondents.
4. Requirement for the subject post, as per the advertisement,
was that a candidate should have the educational qualification
of Higher Secondary or (10+2) examination in Mathematics
subject. In the Chhattisgarh Public Works (PWD), Irrigation,
WA No.213 of 2021
Public Health Engineering etc. Departments Workcharged
and Contingency Paid Employees Recruitment and
Conditions of Service Rules, 1975 governing the subject
recruitment, the necessary qualification is the same as was
mentioned in the advertisement. It was the case of the
petitioner that he has passed his Higher Secondary School
Certificate Examination with Mathematics as one of the
subject, therefore, as per the advertisement and as per the
recruitment rules he was duly qualified and, as such, he
should have been preferred over and above the private
respondents.
5. Learned Single Judge has found that Mathematics was not
one of the main subject of the petitioner in his Higher
Secondary School Certificate Examination whereas the
private respondents have passed Higher Secondary School
Certificate Examination with Mathematics as one of the main
subject.
6. If we peruse the certificate-cum-marksheet of the Higher
Secondary School Certificate Examination, 2010 of the
petitioner filed as Annexure-P/5 with the writ petition, it
carries the mark distribution in the following manner :
Subjects :
Hindi (Special)
English (General)
Physics
Chemistry
Biology
Additional Subject
If any
Mathematics
WA No.213 of 2021
7. Bare perusal of the marksheet would make it abundantly clear
that the applicant (petitioner herein) had chosen Mathematics
as one of the additional subject and not main subject. The
curriculum/course/syllabus for main subject and additional
subject are different. It is as if a candidate opting
Mathematics as one of the additional subject has elementary
study of Mathematics but has not been taught Mathematics as
one of the main subject and precisely for this reason the grand
total in the said examination is calculated on the basis of
marks secured in the main subjects and the marks obtained in
the additional subject is not counted in the grand total.
8. In our considered view, the learned Single Judge has decided
the petitioner's contention properly by dealing with the issue
in an appropriate manner. There being no error in the order
passed by the learned Single Judge there is no substance in
this intra Court appeal, which fails and is hereby dismissed at
the admission stage itself.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Prashant Kumar Mishra) (N.K. Chandravanshi)
Acting Chief Justice Judge
Gowri
