KAJAL SHUKLA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

<div> 1<br /> <br /> 2026:CGHC:14645<br /> <b>NAFR </b><br /> <br /> <b>HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR</b><br /> <b>WPS No. 1360 of 2021</b><br /> <b>1.</b> Vedprakash S/o Ramgee Aged About 34 Years R/o Village 14, <br /> Chuchrungpur, Post Office Gudha, District Kabirdham <br /> Chhattisgarh Pin 491336<br /> <b>2.</b> Sunil Kumar Pal S/o Anjori Pal Aged About 30 Years R/o Village <br /> Lalpur, Post Office Pandhi, Tehsil And District Bemetara <br /> Chhattisgarh Pin 491335<br /> <b>3.</b> Deepika Chandravanshi D/o Ramesh Kumar Aged About 29 <br /> Years R/o Anand Vihar Colony, Ward No. 08, Kawardha, District <br /> Kabirdham Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>4.</b> Gaurav Kumar S/o Rakesh Kumar Aged About 24 Years R/o <br /> Ward No. 01, Mandir Para, Semarsal District Mungeli <br /> Chhattisgarh Pin 495330<br /> --- <b> Petitioner(s) </b><br /> <b>versus</b><br /> <b>1.</b> State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of <br /> School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar <br /> Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>2.</b> Director Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa <br /> Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh<br /> --- <b> Respondent(s) </b><br /> <b>WITH</b><br /> <b>WPS No. 2080 of 2021</b><br />  Kajal Shukla D/o Chinta Mani. Aged About 24 Years R/o Village <br /> Panderbhattha, Tehsil Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G.)<br /> --- <b>Petitioner(s) </b><br /> <b>Versus</b><br /><br /> 2<br /> <b>1.</b> State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education <br /> Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa <br /> Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)<br /> <b>2.</b> Director Public Instructions Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa <br /> Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)<br /> --- <b> Respondent(s) </b><br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>For Petitioners</th><th>:</th><th>Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>For Respondents</td><td>:</td><td>Mr. Vivek S. Ojha, P.L.</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> <b> Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey</b><br /> <b>Order On Board</b><br /> <b>27.3.2026</b><br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>1)</th><th></th><th>By way of this petition, petitioners have sought following reliefs:-</th></tr></thead><tbody></tbody></table><table><thead><tr><th>10.1</th><th>That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be</th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>pleased to set-aside the clause no. 28 of the</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>general notification alongwith order dated</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>23.01.2021 and 2.3.2021 (Annexures P/1).</td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table><table><thead><tr><th>10.2</th><th>That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be</th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>pleased to respondent authorities to consider the</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>petitioners for the post of Teacher.</td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table><table><thead><tr><th>10.3</th><th>That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be</th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>pleased to grant any other relief as it may deems</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>fit and appropriate.</td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table><table><thead><tr><th>2)</th><th></th><th>Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners</th></tr></thead><tbody></tbody></table><div><br /> participated in the recruitment process conducted by CG-<br /> VYAPAM for appointment to the posts of Teacher and Assistant <br /> Teacher but during the course of counseling, they were declared <br /> ineligible on the ground that they could not submit the CTET <br /> certificate prior to 21.11.2019 which was the last date for <br /> submitting the relevant documents during counseling process. He <br /> contends that result of CGTET was declared on 4.1.2020 and <br /><br /> 3<br /> candidates who obtained the certificate of CGTET were permitted <br /> to submit their certificates and they were found fit and were <br /> considered for appointment to the posts of Teacher and Assistant <br /> Teacher. He argues that this action on the part of respondent <br /> authorities is discriminatory, therefore respondent authorities may <br /> be directed to consider the claim of petitioners.<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>3)</th><th></th><th>On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that cut-off</th></tr></thead><tbody></tbody></table><div><br /> date to submit the relevant documents was 29.11.2019 whereas <br /> result of CTET was declared on 27.12.2019, therefore petitioners <br /> were declared ineligible vide orders dated 23.1.2021 and <br /> 2.3.2021 respectively. He further submits that these petitions <br /> deserve to be dismissed.<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>4)</th><th></th><th>Heard.</th></tr></thead><tbody></tbody></table><table><thead><tr><th>5)</th><th></th><th>Petitioners have specifically pleased that result of CGTET was</th></tr></thead><tbody></tbody></table><div><br /> declared on 4.1.2020 i.e. after the cut-off date (21.11.2019) and <br /> the candidates who obtained the certificate of CGTET were <br /> declared eligible but there is no specific plea in this regard in the <br /> return filed by State.<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>6)</th><th></th><th>Result of CTET was declared on 27.12.2019 and result of CGTET</th></tr></thead><tbody></tbody></table><div><br /> was declared on 4.1.2020 but respondent authorities considered <br /> the candidature of CGTET qualified candidates and rejected the <br /> candidature of petitioners who are CTET qualified, thus action on <br /> the part of respondent authorities is arbitrary, discriminatory and <br /> violative of Articles of 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.<br /><br /> 4<br /> <b>7)</b> Accordingly, the orders dated 23.01.2021 and 2.3.2021 pertaining <br /> to the petitioners are hereby set aside and these petitions stand <br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>allowed</th><th>directing respondent authorities to consider the names of</th></tr></thead><tbody></tbody></table><div><br /> petitioners for appointment to the posts of Assistant Teacher and <br /> Teacher, if the posts are lying vacant.<br /> <br /> <b>Sd/-</b><br /> <b>(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)</b><br /> <b> </b> JUDGE<br /> A j i n k y a<br /> Digitally signed<br /> by AJINKYA<br /> PANSARE<br /> Date:<br /> 2026.03.30<br /> 11:05:33 +0530</div>