Chattisgarh High Court
Bodhan Ram Dewangan vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 29 August, 2025
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 5121 of 2021
1 - Bodhan Ram Dewangan S/o Shri Nand Lal Dewangan Aged About 35 Years
R/o 22, Ward No. 10, Lalpur , Khairagarh, Tahsil Khairagarh District Rajnandgaon
Chhattisgarh., District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s)
REKHA
SINGH versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary School Education Department
Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, Po And Police Station Rakhi , Naya Raipur , District
Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh,
State Of Chhattisgarh.
3 - Divisional Joint Director Education Division Bastar, District Bastar
Chhattisgarh.
--- Respondent(s)
For petitioner : Mr. Ishan Verma, Advocate
For State : Mr. Shubham Bajpayee, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Order on Board
29.08.2025
1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-
"10.1 To kindly quash the order dated 21.01.2021
(Annexure P/1) issued by the Divisional Joint Director,
Education Division, Bastar;
10.2 To issue appropriate writ, directing the
respondent authorities to consider the case of the
petitioner for appointment on the post of Teacher (E &
T cadre) on the basis of CTET certificate;
10.3 grant any other writ/ writs, order/ orders, relief/
reliefs in favour of the petitioner, which the Hon'ble
Court deemed fit & just in the facts and
circumstances of the case, including awarding of the
costs to the petitioner."
2. Mr. Ishan Verma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would
submit that the petitioner participated in the recruitment process for
selection of Teacher. He would fairly submit that the petitioner has
acquired qualification of CTET after submission of application and
declaration of result by respondent authorities. He would submit that
at time of verification of the documents, the petitioner was having
qualification of CTET and that documents were placed by the
petitioner before the concerned authority. He would contend that the
candidature of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that on
the date of submission of application, the petitioner was not having
said qualification. He would submit that the respondent authorities
may be directed to consider the claim of the petitioner in the light of
the judgment of the High Court of Chhattisgarh in the matter of
Himmat Singh Bais Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors. passed in
WPS No. 2353/2011 dated 25.08. 2011.
3. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the
State/respondents would oppose. He would submit that on the date of
submission of application form, the petitioner was not having requisite
qualification of CTET, therefore, his candidature was rejected. He
would contend that subsequently acquiring requisite qualification
would not make the petitioner eligible for post of Teacher. He would
submit that the present petition deserves to be dismissed.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
documents placed on record.
5. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by Mr. Ishan
Verma, the present petition, at this juncture, is disposed of reserving
liberty in favour of the petitioner to make fresh representation raising
all his grievances as informed by Mr. Ishan Verma that the posts are
still lying vacant and in turn, respondent No. 2 is directed to consider
the representation so made by the petitioner expeditiously strictly in
accordance with law after due verification of the vacancy, eligibility.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the
merits of the case.etition is disposed of.
Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
Judge
Rekha
