Writ Appeal Dismissed as Claim for Parity Under 2017 Circular Lacked Demonstrated Factual Similarity

Eight appellants, currently serving as Head Masters in Government Primary Schools in District Bemetara, filed a writ appeal challenging the order dated 24.11.2025 passed by a learned Single Judge in WPS No. 10694 of 2025

The Single Judge had dismissed their writ petition concerning certain service benefits

The appellants also filed I.A. No. 01 seeking condonation of a 69-day delay in filing the appeal

Both parties conceded that the legal issue and factual matrix are identical to a previously decided matter

1. Whether the delay of 69 days in filing the writ appeal should be condoned based on the reasons provided in I.A. No. 01

2. Whether the appellants are entitled to the relief claimed under the Circular dated 10.03.2017, and if they are similarly situated to the petitioners in Pushpalata Manikpuri & Others v. State of Chhattisgarh (WA No. 193 of 2026)

The Court applied the principle of stare decisis and judicial consistency by following its own precedent in Pushpalata Manikpuri & Others v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others (WA No. 193 of 2026), decided on 13.03.2026

That precedent established that interference in an intra-court appeal is only warranted in cases of palpable infirmity and that claimants under the Circular dated 10.03.2017 must demonstrate they are similarly situated to the successful petitioner in Smt. Sona Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh (WA No. 261/2023) to succeed

The Court first addressed the procedural delay, finding that the appellants showed "sufficient cause" and condoned the 69-day lapse

On the merits, the bench observed that the learned Single Judge had dismissed the original petition with "cogent and justifiable reasons"

Since the counsel for both the appellants and the State submitted that the facts and issues were identical to those in WA No. 193 of 2026, the Court held that the appellants failed to demonstrate they were similarly situated to the beneficiaries of previous favorable rulings

Applying the reasoning from the Pushpalata Manikpuri judgment, the Court concluded that the claim under the 10.03.2017 Circular was misconceived

Dismissed the writ appeal on its merits, holding that the issue was squarely covered by the judgment in WA No. 193 of 2026

The Court affirmed the Single Judge's order, concluding the appeal was devoid of merit