Harish Kumar Vs Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvyapam)

1 - Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvyapam) Through- Its Chairman Vyapam Bhawan North Block- Sector 19 Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶11

2 - The Exam Controller Chhattisgarh Vyavasyik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvyapam) Vyapam Bhawan North Block- Sector - 19 Atal Nagar Nava Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶12

... Respondents
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner : Mr. R.S. Patel, Advocate
For Respondents : Mr. Avinash Singh, Advocate

¶13

Hon’ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board

¶14

11.06.2026

¶15

1 The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :-

¶16

“ 10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writs and direct the respondents to correct the category of the

¶17

2

¶18

petitioner in the result of the petitioner in Chhattisgarh Teacher Eligibility Test (TET)2026 as ‘OBC (Non-Creamy Layer)’ instead of OBC (Creamy Layer), in the interest of justice.

¶19

10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ and direct the Respondent Authorities to decide the representation dated 01.04.2026 of the petitioner within stipulated time, in the interest of justice.

¶20

10.3 Any other relief which the Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances may also be provided to the petitioner. ”

¶21

2 Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the petitioner submitted an Online form to appear in the Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) for the year 2026, conducted by the respondents. While filing Online form, the petitioner inadvertently mentioned his category as ‘OBC Creamy Lawyer’, but in fact, he belongs to ‘OBC Non-Creamy Lawyer’. He further submits that he has submitted a representation Annexure P-4 for correction of his category, therefore, he submits that, the respondents may be directed to consider the case of the petitioner and decide the representation (Annexure P-4) submitted by the petitioner by treating his category as ‘OBC Non-Creamy Lawyer’ in place of ‘OBC Creamy Lawyer’.

¶22

3

¶23

3 Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that, specific instructions have been issued by the respondents for filing of Online form, according to which, last date of filing of Online form was 08.12.2025 and any mistake can be corrected from 09.12.2025 till 11.12.2025. He further submits that, similar matter came up before this Court in Writ Appeal No. 770/2024 (Dharmendra Kumar Vs. Chhattisgarh Vyavasyik Pariksha Mandal (CGVyapam and Anr.) , wherein vide Judgment dated 21.11.2024, learned Division Bench did not accept the submission of petitioner therein in that regard and the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by that judgment. He further submits that, similar view has also been reiterated by learned Division Bench in Writ Appeal No. 11/2025 (Preeti -v- Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board (Cgvyapam and Anr.) , therefore he submits that, this writ petition deserves to be rejected out rightly.

¶24

4 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶25

5 As per the instructions issued by the respondents, Clause 3 specifically provides that, correction in the Online form could be done from 1st date after last date of filing of form till 3 days i.e. till 11.12.2025. In the instant case, the petitioner filed representation (Annexure P-4) on 01.04.2026 for correction, i.e. after declaration of result, which is far beyond the stipulated period, as has been provided in the instructions.

¶26

4

¶27

6 Having considered the aforesaid clear instructions issued by the respondents and in the light of the view taken by learned Division Bench of this Court in afore-cited cases, this Court is not inclined to entertain instant writ petition by directing the respondents to decide representation Annexure P-4 filed by the petitioner, as the petitioner has lost time to get corrected his Online form.

¶28

7 Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed at motion stage.

¶29

8 In view of the above, I.A. No.02, an application for urgent hearing and I.A. No.03, an application for hearing the case during summer vacation, stand disposed of.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶32

Anu

Harish Kumar v. Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvyapam)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harish Kumar v. Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvyapam)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rizwan Sakka Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nijakat Sakka Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jahid Mohammad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lalita Sahu Vs Hemlal Sahu

Vinod Kumar Lalwani Vs Manisha Lalwani

Devendra Kumar Damgare Vs Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (Cgvyapam)