Disposed

Suman v. Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvyapam)

Chhattisgarh HC3 Feb 2023WPC/609/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged eligibility status in TET exam due to wrong caste category selection in online form. Court granted time to file fresh representation with updated certificate and directed authority to decide within stipulated period.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file fresh representation with social status certificate within six weeks; respondent authority to decide within eight weeks.

Suman Vs Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

-1-

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) No.609 of 2023

¶4

1. Suman D/o Raghunath Aged About 26 Years R/o - House No. 59, Ramtek, Kanakbira, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶5

---- Petitioner(s)

¶6

Versus

¶7

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

¶8

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

¶9

		---- Respondents
For Petitioner	:	Shri Faisal Akhtar, Advocate.
For VYAPAM	:	Dr. Sourabh Kumar Pandey,Advocate.
	Hon'ble Shri J	ustice P. Sam Koshy
	Orde	r on Board

¶10

03.02.2023

¶11

1. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner appeared in Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) conducted by respondent No.1/VYAPAM in the year 2022. At the time of submission online application form, the petitioner inadvertently put mark in “Other Backward Class Category (Creamy Layer)” instead of “Other Backward Class Category (Non Creamy Layer)”. The petitioner belongs to OBC Category (Non Creamy Layer). On declaration of result, the petitioner came to know that he/she was not considered as OBC Category (Non Creamy Layer) candidate. Upon enquiry, it revealed that the petitioner was treated as “OBC Category (Creamy Layer)” candidate. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted representation before respondent-authority, but till date the said representation has not been considered and decided. The petitioner submits that a direction be issued to respondent-authority to consider and decide representation submitted by the petitioner at the earliest.

¶12

2. Learned counsel for respondents submits that petitioner submitted on-line application, as stated by the counsel for petitioner, the petitioner opted “Other Backward Class Category (Creamy Layer)”, hence, the candidature was considered according to details given by the petitioner in the application. He also contended that along with writ petition, petitioner submitted old 'social status certificate' issued by Competent Authority. As per requirement, candidates are required to submit recent social status

¶13

-2-

¶14

certificate issued by competent authority with application form for considering 'whether candidate comes within non-creamy layer or not'. He also contended that if petitioner submits latest social status certificate before the authority along with representation, the same will be considered and decided expeditiously.

¶15

3. Counsel for the Respondents submits that since the claim of the petitioner is only for participation in the elgibility test, the Respondents are considering the claim of such candidates with permissible rectification.

¶16

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

¶17

5. Heard counsel for parties and perused record of writ petition.

¶18

6. 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 the claim of petitioner directing respondent to decide the representation of petitioner.

¶19

7. In view of above, petitioner is directed to file fresh representation before the respondent-authority along with 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.

¶20

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

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge

¶23

inder

Suman v. Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvyapam)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suman 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammed Rajaali Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Raghunandan Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Hemkumar Chauhan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pitambar Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Jaydhar Mahkul Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sushila Minj Vs Charki @ Manajo Bai