Disposed

Somdutt Lahare v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC23 Jun 2024WPS/4945/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Patwari Training Examination candidate whose higher secondary certificate from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad was held non-equivalent challenged his rejection. The court quashed the rejection order solely because no hearing was afforded and remitted the matter for fresh decision within sixty days.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 12.08.2014 quashed; Joint Collector/Collector, Durg directed to reconsider petitioner's claim after hearing within sixty days.

Somdutt Lahare Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors. — Education and Admissions | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR W.P.(S) No. 4945 of 2014

¶4

Somdutt Lahare son of Shri C.K. Lahare, aged about 27 years, resident of Vivekanand Nagar, Borsi Road, Road No. 3, Durg, Police Station and District-Durg (C.G.)

¶5

---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya New Raipur, Police Station – Rakhi, Civil and Revenue District Raipur (C.G.)

¶8

The Collector, Durg, District Durg (C.G.)

¶9

Chhattisgarh Board of Secondary Education, through its Secretary, Raipur (C.G.)

¶10

Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad, through its Mahamantri, Rambag, Allahabad (U.P.)

¶11

---- Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner	:	Mr. Saket Pandey, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Anup Majumdar, Advocate
For Respondents No. 1 & 2	:	Mr. Kalpesh Ruparel, Panel Lawyer
For Respondent No. 3	:	Mr. Alok Bakshi, Advocate

¶13

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶14

24.06.2024

¶15

Mr. Saket Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner passed the Patwari Training Examination in the year 2014 and his name was in the merit list. The selected candidates were called at the Land Records Branch of the office of Collector, Durg on 31.07.2014, but the candidature of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that he has passed higher secondary from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad (U.P.) which is not equivalent to higher secondary within the State of Chhattisgarh. Mr. Pandey would also submit that no opportunity of hearing was afforded by the Joint Collector while passing the order dated 12.08.2014.

¶16

¶17

On the other hand, Mr. Kalpesh Ruparel, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondents No. 1 and 2 would oppose the submissions made by Mr. Saket Pandey.

¶18

Mr. Alok Bakshi, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 3 would submit that the certificate submitted by the petitioner is not equivalent to higher secondary (10+2) in the State of Chhattisgarh according to the list issued by Chhattisgarh Board of Secondary Education as the petitioner has passed the examination from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad.

¶19

Admittedly, the petitioner has passed Prathama and Madhyama from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad (U.P.). According to the documents submitted by the petitioner himself, it is not equivalent to 10+2.

¶20

Be that as it may, taking into consideration that no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner, the order dated 12.08.2014 is hereby quashed and the Joint Collector/Collector, Durg is directed to consider the claim of the petitioner after affording due opportunity of hearing. The matter is remitted back to the Joint Collector/Collector, Durg who shall decide the claim of the petitioner preferably within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶21

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the merits of the case.

¶22

With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), this petition is disposed of .

¶23

Sd/-

¶24

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶25

vatti

Somdutt Lahare v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Somdutt Lahare v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

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

Ghanshayam Yadav Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

R. S. Rathore Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Anju Lahare Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dr. Basant Kumar Dahariya Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Anjor Singh Painkara Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Kamlakant Tiwari Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.