Dismissed¶¶34

Rupesh Kumar Dewangan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC7 Jul 2026WPC/2332/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur; WPC No. 2332 of 2022; decided 08.07.2026 by Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas (single judge). Keywords: M.Sc. (Mathematics) admission eligibility; core/main subject vs allied/foundation subject; BE Mechanical graduate; Annexure P/1 marksheet; Annexure P/4 admission declined; admit card not issued; admission granted by mistake during COVID-19 period; Shahid Mahendra Karma University, Bastar; Govt. Kaktiya Postgraduate College, Jagdalpur; writ petition dismissed; liberty to claim damages for wasted academic year; all questions left open; no statutes or precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; no substantive relief against Annexure P/4, but petitioner granted liberty to seek damages before the appropriate forum, all questions being left open. ¶¶34

Rupesh Kumar Dewangan Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition dismissed; no substantive relief against Annexure P/4, but petitioner granted liberty to seek damages before the appropriate forum, all questions being left open.

¶¶34

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, whose BE (Mechanical) degree included Mathematics only as an allied/foundation subject and not as a core/main subject, was entitled to admission to the M.Sc. (Mathematics) postgraduate course. +2 more

¶¶28

Court's answer

This Court held that the petitioner was wrongly granted admission to the M.Sc. Course, as his own BE (Mechanical) record (Annexure P/1) showed the position relied upon.

¶¶31

Ratio / Principle

Mathematics was an allied subject and not the core subject in the petitioner's BE (Mechanical) degree; consequently he should not have been admitted to the Postgraduate M.Sc. Course.

¶¶31

Key takeaways

The University committed no illegality in not issuing the admit card to the petitioner; accordingly the writ petition deserved to be dismissed.ratio¶¶33
Without examining whether the admission was rightly or wrongly granted and without expressing any opinion on merits, the petitioner was granted liberty to avail recourse to law before the appropriate forum for claiming damages as alleged.obiter¶¶37
The Court clarified that it had not ascertained any rights of any party or authority and left all questions open to be decided by the competent authority/forum in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the Court's observations.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Chhattisgarh (Bilaspur), Vyas, J., dismissed WPC No. 2332 of 2022 filed by a BE (Mechanical) graduate challenging Annexure P/4, whereby the Shahid Mahendra Karma University declined his admission to the M.Sc. course and withheld his examination admit card. The Court found, on the petitioner's own Annexure P/1, that 'Mathematics' was only an allied subject and not the core subject in his BE (Mechanical) degree, so he should not have been admitted to the Postgraduate M.Sc. Course; the University, which had admitted him by mistake during the COVID-19 period, committed no illegality in not issuing the admit card. While dismissing the petition, the Court, without deciding the correctness of the admission or expressing any view on merits, left the petitioner at liberty to pursue a damages claim before the appropriate forum, and expressly left all questions open.

CGHC010167122022

2026:CGHC:28322

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPC No. 2332 of 2022

¶7

Digitally ABHIGYA signed by SAXENA ABHIGYA SAXENA

¶8

1 - Rupesh Kumar Dewangan S/o Jagdish Dewangan, Aged About 29 Years R/o Dewanganpara, Ambagarh Chowki, Ward No. 11, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.

¶9

... Petitioner(s)

¶10

versus

¶11

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Higher Education Department, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶12

2 - The Registrar, Shahid Mahendra Karma University, Bastar, Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh.

¶13

3 - The Vice Chancellor, Shahid Mahendra Karma, University, Bastar, Jagdalpur District Bastar Chhattisgarh.

¶14

4 - The Principal, Govt. Kaktiya Postgraduate College, Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh.

¶15

... Respondent(s)

¶16

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rudra Pratap Dubey, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Gautam Khetrapal, Advocate For State : Mr. Khulesh Sahu, Panel Lawyer For Respondent(s) : Mr. Neeraj Choubey, Advocate

¶17

¶18

Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas

¶19

Order on Board

¶20

08.07.2026

¶21

This petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for the following relief(s):-

¶22

“ 10.1. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, thereby setting-aside the impugned order (Annexure P/4).

¶23

10.2. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to appear in the examination by issuing admit card in favour of petitioner and by conducting fresh examination for the petitioner.

¶24

10.3. That any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the cost of the petition may be given. ”

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has obtained a BE degree in Mechanical, during which he had also studied Mathematics as one of the subjects. On the said qualification, he was rightly granted admission to the M.Sc. course. However, despite his valid admission and continuation in the said course, the University has illegally denied him the opportunity to pursue the same. It is prayed for quashment of

¶26

¶27

Annexure P/4, whereby the petitioner's admission to the said course has been declined.

¶28

On the other hand, learned counsel for the University submits that the petitioner was granted admission due to a mistake during the COVID-19 period; otherwise, he was not entitled to admission to the M.Sc. (Mathematics) course. It is submitted that, for admission to the said course, a candidate must have Mathematics as the core/main subject at the graduation level, whereas, in the petitioner's BE (Mechanical) course, Mathematics was only an allied/foundation subject. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to admission to the M.Sc. postgraduate course unless he has completed his undergraduate degree in the respective subject.

¶29

Learned counsel for the State supported the submission made by the counsel appearing for the University.

¶30

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

¶31

Considering the rival submission of the parties, this Court is of the view that the petitioner was wrongly granted admission in M.Sc. Course as the petitioner has himself annexed a copy of the BE (Mechanical) course (Annexure P/1) wherein it is apparent that subject ‘Mathematics’ is an allied subject but not the core subject as such he should not get admission in the Postgraduate course for imparting education for M.Sc. Course, therefore, the

¶32

¶33

university has not committed any illegally in not issuing admit card in favour of the present petitioner. Thus, the present writ petition deserved to be dismissed.

¶34

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed .

¶35

Further, counsel for the petitioner submits that, even the petitioner was wrongly granted admission to the said course, he cannot suffer for the mistake committed by the respondent University, as one academic year of the petitioner has been wasted on account of such error. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioner may be granted liberty to avail such remedy as may be available to him under the law for claiming damages on account of the wrongful-doing of the respondents.

¶36

Learned counsel for the university objected the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner.

¶37

Also, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and without examining the issue as to whether the petitioner was rightly or wrongly granted admission to the M.Sc. Course, and also without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the petitioner is at liberty to avail recourse of law before the appropriate forum available to him for claiming of his damages as alleged.

¶38

It is made clear that this Court has not ascertained any rights of any of the parties or authority. All questions are left open to be

¶39

¶40

considered and decided by the competent authority/forum in accordance with law, after examining the material that may be produced before it, without being influenced from any of the observations made by this Court in the foregoing paragraphs.

¶41

Sd/- Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

¶42

Saxena

Rupesh Kumar Dewangan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rupesh Kumar Dewangan 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

Vyas Narayan Dewangan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shiv Kumar Chandrakar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Usatlal Sahu Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Rajendra Prasad Pandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Sakun Bai Vs Devid Kumar Sahu

Pitamber Nishad Vs State of Chhattisgarh