Chattisgarh High Court
High Court Of Chhattisgarh vs Smt. Radha Dadsena on 7 August, 2025
1/5
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally
WA No. 581 of 2025
signed by
SHOAIB
SHOAIB ANWAR
ANWAR Date:
2025.08.08
18:28:35
+0530
1 - High Court Of Chhattisgarh Through Registrar General,
Chhattisgarh High Court, Bodri, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
(Respondent No. 1)
2 - Registrar Commercial Court (District Level), Second Floor,
Yojna Bhawan, Sector 19, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District
Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Respondent No. 2)
3 - Judge Commercial Court (District Level), Second Floor, Yojna
Bhawan, Sector 19, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur,
Chhattisgarh (Respondent No. 3)
4 - President Selection And Promotion Committee, Commercial
Court (District Level), Second Floor, Yojna Bhawan, Sector 19,
Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
(Respondent No. 4)
5 - Member Selection And Promotion Committee, Commercial
Court (District Level), Second Floor, Yojna Bhawan, Sector 19,
Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
(Respondent No. 5)
... Appellants
versus
1 - Smt. Radha Dadsena W/o Shri Mukesh Dadsena Aged About
36 Years R/o Flat No. Lig-27, Himalayan Heights, Dumartarai,
District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Petitioner)
... Respondent(s)
Cause title taken from CIS
Order sheet
07/08/2025 Heard Shri Amrito Das, learned counsel for the
appellants. Also heard Shri Achyut Tiwari learned
counsel for the respondent.
The appellants (respondents in writ petition)
preferred the present appeal against the order
dated 25.06.2025 passed by the learned single Judge
in WPS No. 2570/2024 (Smt. Radha Dadsena v High
Court of Chhattisgasrh & Others) by which the writ
petition filed by the respondent herein was partly
allowed and directed to appoint the writ petitioner
on the post of Assistant Grade-III within six weeks
from the date of receipt of the said order. However,
declined to grant back wages as also the seniority.
Learned counsel for the appellant
(respondents in WPS) would submit that since all the
selected candidates had joined the advertised post,
the selection process stood concluded/completed as
enunciated in 'n' number of judgments by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein it has been held
that if a selected candidate joins and subsequently
resigns from the said post, the consequent vacancy
cannot be filled up by selecting a candidate from the
waiting list. In other words, the fresh vacancy
arising out of resignation of a selected candidate
can only be filled up by way of issuing a fresh and
appropriate advertisement. He would further
submit that rejection of representation of the writ
petitioner was not arbitrary, as the appellants herein
assigned sufficient and cogent reasons for non
consideration of the candidature of the petitioner.
According to him, no candidate has any claim or
right to be appointed over a vacant post.
Admit.
Issue notice to the respondent on payment of
process fee as per rules.
Also heard on I.A. No. 01/2025, this is an
application for grant of stay.
Having considered the entire facts and
circumstances of the case,the effect and operation
of impugned order dated 25.06.2025 passed by the
Learned Single Judge in W.P.S. No. 2570/2024, shall
remain kept in abeyance, till the next date of
hearing.
Accordingly, I.A. No. 01/2025 stands disposed
of.
Post it for final hearing in its due course.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
Gowri/Shoaib
