Disposed¶26

Ewan Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC12 Aug 2025WPS/1968/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court writ (WPS No. 1968 of 2021, decided 13.08.2025, neutral ID 2025:CGHC:40803); Teacher (English) recruitment 2019; candidature rejected for acquiring TET before graduation; Court held TET was passed after first graduation (2012) and before English Literature graduation (2019); rejection set aside; matter remanded for reconsideration within 90 days; interim order kept one Teacher (English) post vacant; respondents: State Education Department, Directorate of Public Instruction, Joint Director Durg; counsel: Ajay Shrivastava for petitioner, Pramod Shrivastava Dy.G.A. for State.

What did the court decide?

Rejection of candidature (Annexure-P/1) set aside; matter remitted to respondent authorities for reconsideration, to be completed within 90 days; petition disposed of with the aforesaid observations. ¶26

Ewan Kumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Rejection of candidature (Annexure-P/1) set aside; matter remitted to respondent authorities for reconsideration, to be completed within 90 days; petition disposed of with the aforesaid observations.

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the rejection of the petitioner's candidature (Annexure P-1) for the post of Teacher (English) on the ground that his TET certificate was acquired before completing graduation should be quashed, and the petitioner considered for appointment with consequential benefits.

¶17

Court's answer

On the record, the petitioner cleared his first graduation in 2012, acquired the TET certificate in 2017, obtained University permission on 9.1.2017 for a second graduation with English Literature, and completed that graduation in 2019; thus the petitioner passed the TET examination after graduation and before the subject-specific graduation.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

The reason assigned by respondent No.3 for rejecting the petitioner's candidature is erroneous and is set aside.

¶25

Key takeaways

The matter is remitted back to the respondent authorities for reconsideration.ratio¶25
The competent authority shall complete the entire exercise within a period of 90 days in accordance with law.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Chhattisgarh (Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J.), WPS No. 1968 of 2021, decided 13.08.2025: The petitioner's candidature for the post of Teacher (English) under a recruitment advertised on 5.5.2019 was rejected vide Annexure-P/1 dated 3.3.2021 on the ground that his TET certificate predated his graduation. The Court found that the petitioner had completed his first graduation in 2012, qualified TET in 2017, and thereafter completed a second graduation with English Literature in 2019 (permitted by the University vide order dated 9.1.2017); consequently, the ground of rejection was erroneous. The rejection was set aside and the matter remitted to the respondent authorities for reconsideration, to be completed within 90 days in accordance with law; the petition was disposed of accordingly. In compliance with an interim order dated 8.6.2021, one post of Teacher (English) had been kept vacant.

2025:CGHC:40803

NAFR

SMT NIRMALA RAO

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPS No. 1968 of 2021

¶7

1 - Ewan Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Dwarika Ram Sahu, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Sohpur, Post Nipani, Block Gurur, District Balod Chhattisgarh., District : Balod, Chhattisgarh

¶8

... Petitioner(s)

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director, Directorate Of Public Instruction Chhattisgarh Raipur Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

3 - Joint Director, Department Of Education Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶12

... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Shri Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Pramod Shrivastava, Dy.G.A.

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶14

Order on Board

¶15

13.08.2025

¶16

The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs:-

¶17

“(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash Annexure P-1 and direct the respondent authorities to consider the petitioner for appointment on the post of Teacher (English) with all consequential benefit, in the interest of justice.

¶18

(ii) Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.”

¶19

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that pursuant to the advertisement dated 5.5.2019, the petitioner submitted an application form for the post of Teacher (English). He would contend that the required qualification for the post was graduation, D.Ed/ B.Ed, and TET. He would further contend that the petitioner has the requisite qualifications and, therefore, he was selected and called for document verification. He would also contend that, as the petitioner had passed the TET in 2017, his candidature was rejected vide Annexure-P/1 dated 3.3.2021 on the ground that he acquired the TET certificate before completing graduation. He would further submit that the petitioner completed his first graduation in 2012 and subsequently appeared for and qualified for the TET examination in 2017. Thereafter, upon obtaining permission from the University, he pursued a second graduation with English Literature as a subject. He would also submit that since the petitioner had already done his graduation in 2012, he was eligible to appear in the TET examination. In 2019, he completed his second graduation with English Literature, thereby fulfilling the subject-specific qualification. Hence, the rejection of his candidature, as communicated vide Annexure-P/1, is arbitrary and liable to be quashed. He would further argue that, in compliance with the interim order dated 8.6.2021, one post of Teacher English in the cadre has been kept vacant.

¶21

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that the petitioner passed TET examination prior to his graduation,

¶22

¶23

therefore, his candidature was rejected. He would contend that the petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶24

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on the record.

¶25

The petitioner participated in the recruitment process for appointment to the post of Teacher (English). The documents would show that the petitioner cleared his graduation in 2012 and acquired a TET certificate in 2017. Thereafter, the petitioner sought permission from the concerned University to pursue graduation with English Literature, which was permitted vide order dated 9.1.2017. Subsequently, he completed his graduation with English Literature subject in 2019. Thus, it is evident that the petitioner passed the TET examination after graduation, and before another graduation with subject-specific to English Literature. Therefore, the reason assigned by respondent No.3 for rejecting the candidature of the petitioner is erroneous and is accordingly set aside. The matter is remitted back to the respondent authorities for reconsideration. The entire exercise shall be completed by the competent authority within a period of 90 days in accordance with the law.

¶26

With the aforesaid observation(s), the present petition is disposed of.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶29

Nimmi

Ewan Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ewan Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shakuntla Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ram Kumar Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sudarshan Singh Kurre Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Munni Lal Pal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vinod Kumar Lalwani Vs Manisha Lalwani

Rajesh Golchha Vs Tahira Begum