Disposed

Deepika Gosai v. Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvyapam)

Chhattisgarh HC4 Apr 2023WPC/1444/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On an application for participation in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) where petitioners accidentally selected the OBC-Creamy Layer category instead of OBC-Non-Creamy Layer, the Court directed the respondents to decide the fresh representation along with a social status certificate within 8 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to file fresh representation with social status certificate within 6 weeks; respondents to decide within 8 weeks of receipt.

Deepika Gosai Vs Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik… — Service and Employment | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

WPC No. 1444 of 2023

¶5

Deepika Gosai D/o Puran Puri Gosai Aged About 35 Years R/o Chandali, Tahsil Dabhra, District : Sakti, Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvyapam) Vyapam Bhawan North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶9

Exam Controller Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvyapam) Vyapam Bhawan North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

---- Respondent

¶11

WPC No. 1519 of 2023

¶12

Amit Kumar Sahu D/o. Shiv Kumar Sahu, Aged About 36 Years R/o. House No. 177, Dev Chauk, Dhobni, Baloda Bazar, District Balodabazar - Bhatapara Chhattisgarh

¶13

Anjani, D/o. Harprasad, Aged About 27 Years R/o. Ward No. 06, Baloda, District - Janjgir - Champa Chhattisgarh

¶14

---- Petitioner

¶15

Versus

¶16

Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (Cg Vyapam) Vyapam Bhawan North Block Sector 19 Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶17

Exam Controller, Chhattisgarh Vyavasyik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvypam) Vyapam, Bhawan North Block Sector 19 Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶18

---- Respondent

¶19

For Petitioners : Mr. Faisal Akhtar, Advocate Mr. Bharat Lal Sahu, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Avinash Singh, Advocate Dr. Sourabh Pande, Advocate

¶20

Hon'ble Mr. Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board

¶21

04/04/2023

¶22

Learned counsel for petitioners submits that petitioners appeared in Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) conducted by respondent No.1/VYAPAM

¶23

¶24

in the year 2022. At the time of submission of the application form online, petitioners inadvertently put mark in “Other Backward Class Category (Creamy Layer)” instead of “Other Backward Class Category (Non-Creamy Layer)”. Petitioners belong to OBC Category (NonCreamy Layer).

¶25

On declaration of result, petitioners came to know that they were not considered as OBC Category (Non-Creamy Layer) candidate. Upon enquiry, it revealed that they were treated as “Other Backward Class Category (Creamy Layer)” candidate. Immediately, thereafter petitioners submitted representation before respondent-authority, but till date the said representation has not been considered and decided. They submit that a direction be issued to respondent-authority to consider and decide representation submitted by the petitioners at the earliest.

¶26

Learned counsel for respondents submits that petitioners submitted online application, as stated by counsel for petitioners, they themselves opted “Other Backward Class Category (Creamy Layer)”, hence, their candidature were considered according to details given by them in application. He also contended that along with writ petition, petitioners submitted their 'social status certificate' issued by Competent Authority. As per requirement, candidates are required to submit recent social status certificate issued by competent authority with application form for considering 'whether candidate comes within non-creamy layer or not'. He also contended that if petitioners submit their latest social status certificate before the authority along with representation, the same will be considered and decided expeditiously.

¶27

Counsel for the respondents submits that since the claim of the petitioners is only for participation in the elgibility test, the respondents are considering the claim of such candidate with permissible rectification.

¶28

At this stage, counsel for petitioners submits that in view of objection raised by counsel for respondents, petitioners may be permitted to file fresh representation along with recent social status certificate, for which some time may be granted to the petitioners.

¶29

Heard counsel for parties and perused record of writ petition.

¶30

¶31

Considering facts and circumstances of case, nature of grievance, submissions of counsel for parties, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at the motion stage itself without going into merits of claim of petitioners, directing respondents to decide the representation of petitioners.

¶32

In view of above, petitioners are directed to file fresh representation before the respondent-authority along with their social status certificate issued by the Competent Authority within a period of six weeks from today. On making such representation, respondent-authority shall consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law within a further period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of representation.

¶33

With above observations and directions, writ petition stands dispose of.

¶34

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge

¶35

Ved

Deepika Gosai v. Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvyapam)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepika Gosai v. Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvyapam)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manju Mandal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Amarjeet Singh Bhatia Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shivanshu Singh (Minor) Vs Union of India

Smt. Budhraj Kumari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sumend Ram Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Laxmi Yadu Vs State of Chhattisgarh