DIVAKAR SINGH vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Court
Chhattisgarh High Court
Case type
WRIT APPEAL
Decided on
10-04-2026
<div> 1<br /> <b>2026:CGHC:16526-DB</b><br /> <br /> <br /> 2026:CGHC:16526-DB<br /> <b>NAFR </b><br /> <b>HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR</b><br /> <b>WA No. 287 of 2026</b><br /> <b>1.</b> Divakar Singh S/o Harilal Singh Aged About 34 Years R/o Village - <br /> Chharcha, Post and Tahsil - Baikunthpur, District - Baikunthpur-<br /> Koriya, Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>2.</b> Dhananjay Singh S/o Amarjeet Singh Aged About 30 Years R/o <br /> Ward No. 13, Vivekanand Colony, P.S. - Manendragarh, District - <br /> Manendragarh Chirmiri Bharatpur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>3.</b> Riya Das D/o Govind Das Aged About 32 Years R/o Ward No. 15, <br /> Pendra Dafai, P.S. - Manendragarh, District - Manendragarh <br /> Chirmiri Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>4.</b> Ajay Bara S/o Dharamsai Bara Aged About 33 Years R/o Village - <br /> Tihpatra, District Surguja Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>5.</b> Shilpa Yadav D/o Chandra Kumar Yadav Aged About 33 Years <br /> R/o Lig Ground, House No. 280, Padmanabhapur, District - Durg <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>6.</b> Sweta Jendre W/o Chandra Bhan Barre Aged About 34 Years R/o <br /> Ward No. 25, Shanta Kunj, Post And Tahsil - Durg, District - Durg <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>7.</b> Rakesh Kumar Chandrakar S/o Vishnu Prasad Chandrakar Aged <br /> About 34 Years R/o Village - Khopli, Bastipara, Post And Tahsil - <br /> Bagbahra, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>8.</b> Kanchan Dadsena D/o Loknath Dadsena Aged About 38 Years <br /> R/o Village - Rajasewaiya, Post And Tahsil - Pithora, District <br /> Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>... Appellant(s) </b><br /><br /> 2<br /> <b>2026:CGHC:16526-DB</b><br /> <b>versus</b><br /> <b>1.</b> State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of <br /> Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya <br /> Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>2.</b> Commissioner Land Records State Of Chhattisgarh, Indravati <br /> Bahwan, 1st Floor Block-2 Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District - <br /> Raipur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>3.</b> Director, Land Records State Of Chhattisgarh, Indravati Bahwan, <br /> Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>4.</b> Shri K.D. Kunjam Chairman, High Level Investigation Team, Also <br /> Special Secretory, Food Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection <br /> Department, Mantralay, Mahanadi Bahavan, Nava Raipur, Atal <br /> Nagar, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>5.</b> Manjeet Kumar Yadav S/o Ram Nagina Yadav Aged About 32 <br /> Years R/o Police Line, P.S. - Jainagar, District - Surajpur <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>6.</b> Amit Sinha S/o Abhay Prakash Sinha Aged About 37 Years R/o <br /> Village - Govindpur, Turraline, P.S. - Govindpur, District - Surajpur <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>7.</b> Md. Razwan Ali S/o Md Asharaf Ali Aged About 37 Years R/o Ward <br /> No. 14, Ketka Rode, P.S. - Surajpur, District - Surajpur <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>8.</b> Prakash Kumar Singh S/o Jai Bahadur Singh Aged About 30 <br /> Years R/o In Front Of Rest House, Songara, P.S. - Surajpur, <br /> District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>9.</b> Sarita Keshri W/o Pradeep Jaiswal Aged About 35 Years R/o <br /> Village - Brindawan, House No. 37, P.S. - Prem Nagar, Bakalo, <br /> District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>10.</b> Renuka Kashyap W/o Ramshankar Kashyap Aged About 36 Years <br /> R/o Village - Pratapur, P.S. - Surajpur, District - Surajpur <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /><br /> 3<br /> <b>2026:CGHC:16526-DB</b><br /> <b>11.</b> Pooja Mishra W/o Vijay Kumar Mishra Aged About 36 Years R/o <br /> Infront Of Carmel Convent School, Satpata, Post - Bishrampur, <br /> P.S. - Bishrampur, District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>12.</b> Arun Kumar Jaiswal S/o Mooldhar Prasad Jaiswal Aged About 42 <br /> Years R/o Bhaiyathan Road, Mishra Gali, Gopalpur, P.S. - <br /> Gopalpur, District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>13.</b> Teekan Kumar Rajwade S/o Ishwar Prasad Rajwade Aged About <br /> 43 Years R/o Village - N.H. 173 Limbadand, Dwarikanagar, Latori, <br /> District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>14.</b> Samai Pratap Singh S/o Chandrika Prasad Singh Aged About 36 <br /> Years R/o Village - Khadgava, Post And Tehsil - Surajpur, District - <br /> Surajpur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>15.</b> Vinod Singh S/o Ramnath Singh Aged About 37 Years R/o Village <br /> - Na Damali, Bandhanpara, Post And Tehsil - Surajpur, District - <br /> Surajpur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>16.</b> Ashish Kumar Sahu S/o Late Ramvilas Sahu Aged About 41 <br /> Years R/o Ward No. 14, Badkapara, P.S. - Surajpur, District - <br /> Surajpur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>17.</b> Nirmal Kumar Tiwari S/o Ujjain Tiwari Aged About 35 Years R/o <br /> Village - Khorma, Post - Pratappur, District - Surajpur <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>18.</b> Manish Kumar Shrivastav S/o Sunil Shrivastav Aged About 35 <br /> Years R/o Village - Ramnanagr, P.S. - Ramnagar, District - <br /> Surajpur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>19.</b> Saurabh Goswami S/o R.P. Goswami Aged About 35 Years R/o <br /> Village - Badsara, Bhaiyathan, District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>20.</b> Rajeev Lochan Singh S/o Amarendra Singh Aged About 43 Years <br /> R/o Ward No. 10, Premnagar, P.S. - Premnagar, District - Surajpur <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>21.</b> Sunil Kumar Paikra S/o Rajnath Singh Aged About 45 Years R/o <br /> Village - Koteya, Post And Tehsil - Surajpur, District - Surajpur <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /><br /> 4<br /> <b>2026:CGHC:16526-DB</b><br /> <b>22.</b> Amitesh Swarnkar S/o Pradeep Soni Aged About 34 Years R/o <br /> Mahavir Ward, D.C. Road, Ambikapur, District Surguja <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>23.</b> Pratap Ram Painkra S/o Shiya Ram Aged About 39 Years R/o <br /> Ward No. 7, Samblpur, Tahsil And Post - Latori, District - Surajpur <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>24.</b> Raja Ram Ravi S/o Bihari Ram Aged About 25 Years R/o Ward <br /> No. 5, Keshavnagar, District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>25.</b> Ramchandra S/o Raghunath Aged About 48 Years R/o Ward No. <br /> 19, Jampara, P.S. - Baikunthpur, District Koriya Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>26.</b> Ramdev Ram S/o Ashok Kumar Aged About 44 Years R/o Ward <br /> No. 11, Kachari Para, P.S. - Baikunthpur, District Koriya <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>27.</b> Asha Bhagat D/o Kamal Sai Bhagat Aged About 32 Years R/o <br /> Village - Bhandi, Post And Tahsil - Baikunthpur, District Koriya <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>28.</b> Anjali Gupta D/o Pradeep Gupta Aged About 32 Years R/o Ward <br /> No. 14, Bajarpara, P.S. - Baikuntpur, District Koriya Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>29.</b> Prakash Sahu S/o Sobhnath Sahu Aged About 29 Years R/o Ward <br /> No. 4, Jobapara, Ohari, Post - Barbaspur, District Koriya <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>30.</b> Surya Kant Nishad S/o Bisauha Ram Nishad Aged About 45 Years <br /> R/o Village - Amti, Nikum, Post And Tahsil - Durg, District Durg <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>31.</b> Bhaskar Sahu S/o Mahendra Kumar Sahu Aged About 34 Years <br /> R/o Ramnagar Ward 13, Bhilai, District - Durg Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>32.</b> Rakesh Kumar Tamrakar S/o Ram Kumar Tamrakar Aged About <br /> 38 Years R/o Ward No. 11, Post And Tahsil - Lavan, District - <br /> Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>33.</b> Vinita D/o Shyamji Lal Aged About 35 Years R/o Village - Khokli, <br /> Post And Tahsil - Jaraud, District Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /><br /> 5<br /> <b>2026:CGHC:16526-DB</b><br /> <b>34.</b> Rishikesh Mishra S/o Narendra Mohan Mishra Aged About 43 <br /> Years R/o Mahamaya Chock, Post And Tahsil - Lavan, District - <br /> Baloda Bazar - Bhatapara Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>35.</b> Satyawan Pathak S/o Rameshwar Prasad Pathak Aged About 42 <br /> Years R/o Village Kasdol, District - Baloda Bazar - Bhatapara <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>36.</b> Yogendra Kumar Sharma S/o Mani Prasad Sharma Aged About <br /> 44 Years R/o Village - Parsabadher, Post And Tahsil - Baloda <br /> Bazar - Bhatapara Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>37.</b> Jitendra Kumar Dhruw S/o Umeram Dhruw Aged About 39 Years <br /> R/o Village - Amalidiha, Post And Thasil - Narayanpur, District - <br /> Bemetara Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>38.</b> Bhuwan Singh Dhruw S/o Ramphal Dhruw Aged About 46 Years <br /> R/o Village - Khapri, Post And Tahsil - Bilaspur, District Bilaspur <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>39.</b> Manish Kumar Varma S/o Uittra Kumar Varma Aged About 33 <br /> Years R/o Jabdapara, Post And Tahsil - Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>40.</b> Vibhav Singh S/o M.K. Singh Aged About 50 Years Village - <br /> Rajkishor Nagar, Post And Tahsil - Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>41.</b> Bindu Sanadya D/o Ragu Prasad Sanadya Aged About 35 Years <br /> R/o Village Mendra, Post And Tahsil - Chakarbhata, District - <br /> Bilaspur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>42.</b> Ajit Kumar Nirmalkar S/o Ram Kumar Nirmalkar Aged About 35 <br /> Years R/o Village - Parsada Bharnai, Tahsil - Ganiyari, District - <br /> Bilaspur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>43.</b> Rahul Kumar Sahu S/o Gorelal Sahu Aged About 34 Years R/o <br /> Sakri, Post And Tahsil - Sakri, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>44.</b> Sunil Kumar Karn S/o Bachchu Lal Karn Aged About 38 Years R/o <br /> Ward No. 21, House No. 21, Tahsil - Rajnandgaon, District - <br /> Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh<br /><br /> 6<br /> <b>2026:CGHC:16526-DB</b><br /> <b>45.</b> Shubham Sharma S/o Sunil Kumar Sharma Aged About 32 Years <br /> R/o Ward No. 8, Amapara, Post And Tahsil - Ambagarh-Chouki, <br /> District Mohla Manpur Ambagarh Chouki Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>46.</b> Pradeep Dewangan S/o Charan Dewangan Aged About 36 Years <br /> R/o Ward No. 19, Gali No. 3, Tahsil - Rajnandgaon, District - <br /> Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>47.</b> Bhupendra Kumar Kande S/o Gyan Das Khande Aged About 42 <br /> Years R/o Ward No. 12, Gautam Nagar, Tahsil - Rajnandgaon <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>48.</b> Vibha Mishra Tiwari W/o Alok Tiwari Aged About 41 Years R/o <br /> New Khandelwal Colony, Mamta Nagar, District - Rajnandgaon <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>49.</b> Shweta Sharma D/o Suresh Kumar Sharma Aged About 38 Years <br /> R/o Ward No. 39, Mahesh Nagar, Tahsil - Rajnandgaon, District - <br /> Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>50.</b> Safeer Ahmad Khan S/o Habibulla Khan Aged About 45 Years R/o <br /> Ward No. 17, Post And Tahsil - Rajnandgaon, District <br /> Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>51.</b> Mamta Dubey D/o Suresh Kumar Dubey Aged About 34 Years R/o <br /> Ward No. 5, Post And Tahsil - Kawardha, District Kawardha <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>52.</b> Santram Gote S/o Ramsai Gote Aged About 46 Years R/o Ward <br /> No. 5, Telitola, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>53.</b> Shakuntala Vaishnav W/o Devesh Vaishnav Aged About 34 Years <br /> R/o Gali No. 2, Ward No. 11, Shantinagar, District - Rajnandgaon <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>54.</b> Vikesh Kumar Soni S/o Ramesh Chandra Soni Aged About 47 <br /> Years R/o House No. 93/2, Ward No. 22, Devan Para, Tahsil - <br /> Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>55.</b> Anil Kumar Sahu S/o Tameshwar Prasad Sahu Aged About 34 <br /> Years R/o Ward No. 06, Banhardi, District - Rajnadgaon <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /><br /> 7<br /> <b>2026:CGHC:16526-DB</b><br /> <b>56.</b> Ray Singh S/o Prem Singh Aged About 35 Years R/o Ward No. <br /> 10, Fulkodo, Bharritola, District - Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>57.</b> Suman Chandravanshi W/o Human Lal Kanwar Aged About 32 <br /> Years R/o Ward No. 14, Manikpur, Post - Ramatola, District - <br /> Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>58.</b> Jineshwari Sahu W/o Narendra Kumar Sahu Aged About 46 Years <br /> R/o Ward No. 4, Matiyaroad, Dongargao, District - Rajnandgaon <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>59.</b> Vikas Kumar Vasnik S/o Vijay Vasnik Aged About 32 Years R/o <br /> House No. 62, Ward No. 6, Ambagarh Chouki, District - Mohla <br /> Manpur Ambagarh Chouki Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>60.</b> Kanni Lal Beck S/o Jharoo Ram Beck Aged About 51 Years R/o <br /> House No. 102/3, Gangapur Khurd, District - Ambikapur-Surguja <br /> Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>61.</b> Manoj Kumar S/o Ramdayal Singh Aged About 40 Years R/o <br /> Junapara, Krishnanagar, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>62.</b> Ankita Tirkey D/o Rajrup Tirkey Aged About 33 Years R/o Ghoom <br /> Para, Ambikapur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>63.</b> Santosh Kumar Ekka S/o Jeetu Markush Ekka Aged About 44 <br /> Years House No. 22, Mainpat, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>64.</b> Anil Kumar Xalxo S/o Benjamin Xalxo Aged About 37 Years R/o <br /> Gutara Para, Losanga, District Surguja Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>65.</b> Jeet Lal Singh S/o Bishun Ram Aged About 42 Years R/o Village - <br /> Bataikela, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>66.</b> Surya Prakash Joshi S/o Bhagirathi Joshi Aged About 42 Years <br /> R/o Ward No. 46, House No. 17, Bilaspur Road Laxmipur, District <br /> - Surguja Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>67.</b> Shripal Beck S/o Dasai Ram Beck Aged About 37 Years R/o <br /> Village - Parsapali, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>68.</b> Anita Kujur D/o Shobha Kujur Aged About 41 Years R/o House <br /> No. 214, School Para, Batwahi, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh<br /> <b>...Respondent(s)</b><br /> (Cause-title taken from Case Information System)<br /><br /> 8<br /> <b>2026:CGHC:16526-DB</b><br /> For Appellants : Mr. Abbhyuday Singh, Advocate. <br /> For Respondent/State : Mr. Prasun Bhaduri, Deputy Advocate <br /> General. <br /> <b> </b> <b>Hon&#x27;ble Shri </b> <b> Ramesh Sinha, </b> <b> </b> <b> Chief Justice</b> <b> </b> <b> </b><br /> <b> </b> <b>Hon&#x27;ble </b> <b> Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, </b> <b> </b> <b> Judge</b> <b> </b> <b> </b><br /> <b> </b> <b>Judgment</b> <b> on Board</b> <b> </b> <b> </b><br /> <b><i> </i></b> <b><i>Per </i></b> <b><i> </i></b> <b><i> </i></b> <b>Ramesh Sinha</b> <b><i> </i></b> <b><i> </i></b> <b>, Chief Justice</b> <b><i> </i></b><br /> <b> .04.2026</b> <b>10</b> <b> </b> <b> </b><br /> <b>1.</b> Heard Mr. Abhyuday Singh, learned counsel for the appellants. <br /> Also heard Mr. Prasun Bhaduri, learned Deputy Advocate General, <br /> appearing for the State. <br /> <b>2.</b> The present intra Court appeal has been filed by the appellants <br /> against the order dated <b>02.01.2026</b> passed by the learned Single Judge <br /> in <b>WPS No. 1206 of 2025 </b> ( <b><i>Dhananjay Singh &amp; Others vs. State of </i></b><br /> <b><i>Chhattisgarh &amp; Others</i></b> ), whereby the writ petition filed by the <br /> appellants/writ petitioners herein has been dismissed by the learned <br /> Single Judge.<br /> <b>3.</b> It has been pointed out by learned counsel for the parties that in <br /> an identical matter, this Bench had dismissed <b><i>WA No. 149 of 2026 </i></b><br /> <b><i>(Satish Kumar Das &amp; Others vs. State of Chhattisgarh &amp; Others) </i></b><br /> vide order dated <b>26.02.2026</b> , observing as follows :<br /> “7 <i>. Perusal of the impugned order would demonstrate </i><br /> <i>that the learned Single Judge framed the core issue </i><br /> <i>for determination as to whether the departmental </i><br /> <i>examination conducted in the year 2023–2024 for </i><br /><br /> 9<br /> <b>2026:CGHC:16526-DB</b><br /> <i>promotion from Patwari to Revenue Inspector was </i><br /> <i>held in a fair and transparent manner, or whether a </i><br /> <i>direction ought to be issued to the State to send the </i><br /> <i>successful candidates for training. The Court </i><br /> <i>observed that though there may not be any direct </i><br /> <i>material to record a definitive finding, it would examine </i><br /> <i>the matter on the principle of preponderance of </i><br /> <i>probabilities, particularly in light of the report dated </i><br /> <i>29.11.2024. Upon consideration of the said report, the </i><br /> <i>Court noted certain procedural aspects, including the </i><br /> <i>provision for mentioning mobile numbers on OMR </i><br /> <i>sheets, which, according to the Court, could affect the </i><br /> <i>purity of the examination by enabling identification of </i><br /> <i>candidates, thereby creating doubt regarding fairness. </i><br /> <i>The Court further observed that the number of </i><br /> <i>questions had been increased from 50 to 100 within </i><br /> <i>the same 90-minute duration, raising suspicion as to </i><br /> <i>the feasibility of attempting all questions, particularly </i><br /> <i>where some candidates had secured very high marks. </i><br /> <i>Additionally, the allotment of consecutive roll numbers </i><br /> <i>to 22 close relatives posted in different districts was </i><br /> <i>considered as a circumstance giving rise to doubt. </i><br /> <i>Relying upon the principles laid down by the Hon’ble </i><br /> <i>Supreme Court in Vanshika Yadav vs. Union of India </i><br /> <i>and State of West Bengal vs. Baishakhi </i><br /> <i>Bhattacharyya (Chatterjee) &amp; Others, the Court </i><br /> <i>emphasized that sanctity and integrity of examinations </i><br /> <i>must be preserved and that systemic compromise </i><br /> <i>may justify cancellation. The Court distinguished the </i><br /> <i>precedents cited by the petitioners on the grounds of </i><br /> <i>estoppel and legitimate expectation, holding them </i><br /> <i>inapplicable to the present facts. Consequently, the </i><br /> <i>learned Single Judge concluded that the selection </i><br /><br /> 10<br /> <b>2026:CGHC:16526-DB</b><br /> <i>process was tainted with signs of favoritism and </i><br /> <i>nepotism and was not conducted in a fair and </i><br /> <i>transparent manner, therefore, no direction could be </i><br /> <i>issued to send the petitioners for training. While </i><br /> <i>clarifying that the observations shall not affect the </i><br /> <i>pending criminal proceedings, the Court granted </i><br /> <i>liberty to the State to conduct a fresh examination and </i><br /> <i>dismissed the writ petitions accordingly.</i><br /> <i>8. Considering the submissions made by the learned </i><br /> <i>counsel appearing for the parties and upon perusing </i><br /> <i>the impugned order, we notice that the same has been </i><br /> <i>rendered by the learned Single Judge with cogent and </i><br /> <i>justifiable reasons. In an intra-court appeal, no </i><br /> <i>interference is usually warranted unless palpable </i><br /> <i>infirmities are noticed on a plain reading of the </i><br /> <i>impugned order. In the facts and circumstances of the </i><br /> <i>instant case, on a plain reading of order, we do not </i><br /> <i>notice any such palpable infirmities or perversities, as </i><br /> <i>such we are not inclined to interfere with the </i><br /> <i>impugned order.</i><br /> <i>9. Accordingly, the writ appeal being devoid of merit is </i><br /> <i>liable to be and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s).</i><br /> <i>10. Pending applications, if any, stand dismissed.</i> ”<br /> They further submitted that since the facts and issue involved in <br /> the present case is identical to that of WA No. 149 of 2026, this appeal <br /> may also be dismissed in the same terms.<br /> <b>4.</b> Having considered the rival submissions advanced by the learned <br /> counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the materials available on <br /> record, it is evident that the facts and the issues involved in the present <br /><br /> 11<br /> <b>2026:CGHC:16526-DB</b><br /> appeal are identical to those in <b>WA No. 149 of 2026</b> . Accordingly, this <br /> Court deems it appropriate to adopt the view taken in <b>WA No. 149 of </b><br /> <b>2026 </b> and does not find any reason to take a different view in the <br /> present matter. <br /> <b>5.</b> Accordingly, the present appeal is <b>dismissed</b> in terms of the order <br /> dated <b>26.02.2026</b> passed in <b>WA No. 149 of 2026. </b><br /> <b> Sd/- Sd/-</b><br /> <b> (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha)</b><br /> <b> </b> <b> Judge </b> <b> Chief Justice </b><br /> <b>Brijmohan</b><br /> </div>