STATE OF CHHATTISGARH vs NIRMAL KUMAR SONI

1

CGHC010191382025 2026:CGHC:38538-DB
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WA No. 354 of 2025
1. State of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, School Education
Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar , Raipur,
District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Respondent No. 1)
2. The Secretary, Panchayat Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi
Bhawan, Atal Nagar , Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
(Respondent No. 2)
... Appellant(s)
versus
1. Nirmal Kumar Soni S/o Late Binda Prasad Soni Aged About 51
Years R/o Mahalpara Road, Near Durga Mandir Baikunthpur,
District - Korea, District Koriya (Baikunthpur) Chhattisgarh,
2. Suresh Prasad S/o Sitaram Aged About 44 Years R/o Domanhill,
Prem Nagar, Post - Sonawani Colliery, District - Korea, District
Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner No. 2)
3. Chandrabhushan Singh S/o Late Gyanendranath Aged About 59
Years R/o In Front Of Bsnl Office, Jail Road, Surajpur, District -
Surajpur, Chhattisgarh, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner
No. 3)
4. Jayanth Kumar Sinha S/o Shri P. K. Sinha Aged About 59 Years
R/o Jail Road Bahupara, In Front Of Pwd Workshop, Ambikapur
District - Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District Surguja (Ambikapur),
Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner No. 4)
Digitally
signed by
BRIJMOHAN
MORLE
Date:
2026.09.02
10:44:03
+0530
5. Rajesh Kumar Ambastha S/o Late Shri M.P. Ambastha Aged
BRIJMOHAN
MORLE
About 52 Years R/o Kedarpur Near Pahuna Shop Ambikapur,

2
District Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District Surguja (Ambikapur),
Chhattisgarh (Petitioner No. 5)
6. Sanjaydev Acharya S/o Late Shri Falguni Acharya Aged About 52
Years R/o Chandni Chowk Mayapur, Ambikapur, District Surguja,
Chhattisgarh, District Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh.
(Petitioner No. 6)
7. Ramesh Kumar Rai S/o Ramashankar Rai Aged About 44 Years
R/o Kedarpur Near Pahuna Shop, Ambikapur, District Surguja,
Chhattisgarh, District Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh
(Petitioner No. 7)
8. Vinod Kumar Panwar S/o Shri Satyapal Panwar Aged About 50
Years R/o 28/2, Infront Of Hotel Shailgiri, Rawatpara
Manendragarh Road, Ambikapur, District Surguja , Chhattisgarh,
District Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh (Petitioner No. 8)
9. Smt. Kavita Bansal W/o Shri Ajay Bansal Aged About 42 Years
R/o Jaisthamb Chowk. Agrasen Ward. Ambikapur, District -
Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh
(Petitioner No. 9)
10. Smt. Sudha Hisikar W/o Shri Ramesh Kumar Hisikar Aged About
45 Years R/o Chameli Chowk ,amapara, Dhamtari, District
Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner No. 10)
11. Smt. Farida Begum W/o Shri Firoz Khan Aged About 45 Years R/o
Patelbadi Gouravpath, Ramsagar Para Dhamtari, District
Dhamtari (Petitioner No. 11)
12. K.K. Tiwari S/o Tarachand Tiwari Aged About 52 Years R/o
Ramgopal Tiwari Ward No. 1, Pathakpara Mungeli, District
Mungeli, Chhattisgarh (Petitioner No. 12)
13. Sunil Kumar Pathak S/o Ramji Pathak Aged About 50 Years R/o
Ramgopal Tiwari, Ward No. 1 Pathakpara Mungeli District
Mungeli. (Petitioner No. 13)
14. Tamesh Sahu S/o Dhanush Sahu Aged About 50 Years R/o
Sardarpatel Ward, Behind Manuraj Talkies Mungeli, Chhattisgarh,
District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner No. 14)

3
15. Vijay Narayan Pandey S/o Shri A.P. Pandey Aged About 52 Years
R/o Sargipal Para. Kondagaon, District Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh.
(Petitioner No. 15)
16. Parsuram Namdev S/o Late Shri Halkeyram Namdev Aged About
53 Years R/o Aspatal Ward, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon,
Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner No. 16)
...Respondent(s)
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Appellants/State : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Additional
Advocate General.
For Respondents : Mr. Keshav Dewangan, Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge
Judgment on Board
Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
01.09.2026
1. Heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General,
appearing for the State/appellants. Also heard Mr. Keshav Dewangan,
learned counsel, appearing for the respondents.
2. Also heard the learned counsel for the parties on I.A. No. 1 of
2025, which is an application for condonation of delay.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering
the reasons mentioned in the application, we are of the considered
opinion that sufficient cause has been shown in the application,
accordingly, I.A. No. 1 of 2025 is allowed and delay of 1090 days is

4
condoned.
4. The State has filed the instant Writ Appeal challenging therein
order dated 30.03.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS
No. 735 of 2020 ( Nirmal Kumar Soni & Others vs. State of
Chhattisgarh & Another ), whereby, the writ petition preferred by the
private respondents/ petitioners has been allowed and the matter was
remitted back to the State to take a fresh decision on the claim of the
petitioners for appointment on the post of “Lecturer” or in the alternative
as “Lab Assistant”.
5. Learned counsel for the State would submit that the issue involved
in this writ appeal has already been decided by the Division Bench of
this Court in Writ Appeal No. 227 of 2013 and Writ Appeal No. 242 of
2013 , where, relief of regularization of part time teachers on the post of
Lecturers and Lab Assistants was denied and Division Bench vide order
dated 27.06.2014 held as under :-
“7. The notification on which the right has been claimed is
merely an administrative instructions. There is no
statutory right of regularization.
8. Apart from above, no one has a right to claim
regularization over any post. It is a benefit to be conferred
by the State Government. The regularization can also not
be done unless the posts are available.
9. The State Government has ultimately regularized the
Appellants and other similarly situate candidates over the
post Shiksha Karmi Grade-III.
10. Considering all the aspects of the matter, the single

5
judge has refused to exercise writ jurisdiction in favour of
the Appellants. We see no justification to interfere with
the order passed by the Single Judge.”
6. Learned counsel for the State also submits that the issued
involved in the present appeal came up for consideration before this
Court in an identical writ appeal and the same was dealt by this Court in
WA No. 55 of 2023 ( State of Chhattisgarh vs. Rajesh Kumar Pathak
& Others ).
7. Learned counsel for the respondents would not dispute the
submissions made by learned counsel for the State.
8. Considering the submissions made by rival parties and particularly
considering that in Writ Appeal No.227 of 2013 and Writ Appeal
No.242 of 2013 , this Court has already refused relief of regularization to
the similarly situated candidates, we are of the considered view that the
order passed by learned Single Judge in WPS No. 735 of 2020 dated
30.03.2022 is not sustainable in the eye of law. Consequently, order
dated 30.03.2022 passed in WPS No. 735 of 2018 is hereby set aside
and appeal is accordingly allowed .
9. No order as to cost(s).
Sd/- Sd/-
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
Brijmohan