Facts
The Petitioner, an OBC candidate, applied online for the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) 2026 conducted by the Respondents
Source reference: para. 2Due to an inadvertent error, she marked her category as "OBC Creamy Layer" instead of "OBC Non-Creamy Layer"
Source reference: para. 2Following the declaration of results, the Petitioner submitted a representation on 25-03-2026 seeking a category correction and the issuance of a fresh certificate
Source reference: para. 1.2, 5The Respondents opposed the petition, stating that the specific instructions provided a correction window from 09-12-2025 to 11-12-2025, and the Petitioner’s request was made significantly after this deadline and the declaration of results
Source reference: para. 3, 5Issues
Whether the Petitioner is entitled to a direction for correction of her category status after the expiry of the stipulated correction period and the declaration of exam results
Source reference: para. 2, 6Law Applied
The court applied the administrative instructions governing the examination process, specifically Clause 3, which mandates that corrections to online forms must be completed within a three-day window following the application deadline
Source reference: para. 5the legal principles established by the Division Bench of the Chhattisgarh High Court in Dharmendra Kumar v. Chhattisgarh Vyavasyik Pariksha Mandal (Writ Appeal No. 770/2024) and Preeti v. Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board (Writ Appeal No. 11/2025), which hold that candidates cannot seek corrections to application details once the prescribed timeline has lapsed
Source reference: para. 3, 6Reasoning
The court examined the timeline of the examination process and found that the Petitioner failed to utilize the correction window provided between 09-12-2025 and 11-12-2025
Source reference: para. 5The Petitioner approached the authorities only on 25-03-2026, well after the results were declared
Source reference: para. 5The court noted that the Respondents had issued clear instructions regarding the finality of the data after the correction period
Source reference: para. 5By applying the precedent set by the Division Bench in similar matters, the court reasoned that the Petitioner had lost her right to seek modification of her category status due to her own negligence and the lapse of the stipulated time
Source reference: para. 3, 6Holding
The court dismissed the writ petition at the motion stage, holding that no relief can be granted for category corrections sought after the expiry of the prescribed period and the declaration of results
The court declined to direct the Respondents to consider the Petitioner’s representation, as the case was squarely covered by existing adverse precedents
Source reference: para. 3, 6All pending interlocutory applications were disposed of accordingly
Source reference: para. 8Original Court PDF
JYOTI KAUSHIKvsCHHATTISGARH VYAVASAYIK PARIKSHA MANDAL (CGVYAPAM)
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in