Shyam Sundar Chandra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:24018

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 7983 of 2023

¶6

1 - Shyam Sundar Chandra S/o Pyare Lal Chandra, Aged About 39 Years Ex - Servicemen, Indian Army, R/o Village Piharid, Tahsil Malkharoda, District Sakti Chhattisgarh.

¶7

2 - Ram Kumar Singh Rathore, S/o Bukka Singh Rathore, Aged About 40 Years Ex - Servicemen, Indian Army, R/o Ward No. 28, Old Railway Line Podi Bahar, R.P. Nagar, Phase-Ii, Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

¶8

3 - Sarjoo Kumar Dahariya, S/o. Siya Ram Dahariya, Aged About 40 Years Ex - Servicemen, Indian Army, R/o Village Bamhanin, Tahsil Bamhanin District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.

¶9

4 - Manendra Kumar Rathore, S/o Babu Lal Rathore, Aged About 42 Years ExServicemen, Indian Army, R/o V.P.O. Singansara, Tahsil And District Sakti Chhattisgarh.

¶10

--- Petitioners

¶11

versus

¶12

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶13

2 - Directorate Of Public Instruction, Chhattisgarh, First Floor, Block-C, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶14

3 - Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board, Through Chairman, Vyapam Bhavan, North Block, Sectro -19, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶15

--- Respondents

¶16

Digitally signed by BINI BINI PRADEEP PRADEEP Date: 2026.06.17 14:51:57 +0530

¶17

2

¶18

WPS No. 9211 of 2023

¶19

1 - Puspendra Singh S/o Sajiwan Singh Aged About 39 Years Ex-Servicemen, Indian Army, R/o New Sarkanda, Jabadapara Ojha Gali, Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶20

2 - Surendra Kumar S/o Gajanand Ram Aged About 40 Years Ex-Servicemen, Indian Army, R/o Mudkhusra, Tahsil - Charama, District Kanker (C.G.)

¶21

3 - Ganga Puri S/o Late Shivratan Puri Aged About 40 Years Ex-Servicemen, Indian Army, R/o Village - Devpur, Tahsil And District Dhamtari (C.G.)

¶22

4 - Gopeshwar Kumar Sahu S/o Manohar Sahu Aged About 39 Years ExServicemen, Indian Army, R/o House No. 71, Shiv Chowk, Ward No. 4, Village - Sarbada, Tahsil - Gurur, District Balod (C.G.)

¶23

5 - Bhupendra Kumar S/o Feru Ram Aged About 38 Years Ex-Servicemen, Indian Army, R/o Village - Karsa, Tahsil - Patan, District Durg (C.G.)

¶24

6 - Ravindra Kumar S/o Badev Ram Aged About 39 Years Ex-Servicemen, Indian Army, R/o Village - Devidargaon, Tahsil - Gholebg, District Jashpur (C.G.)

¶25

7 - Youraj Kumar S/o Chhagan Lal Sahu Aged About 39 Years Ex-Servicemen, Indian Army, R/o Village - Chhediya, Tahsil Gurur, District Balod (C.G.)

¶26

--- Petitioners

¶27

Versus

¶28

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Directorate Of Public Instruction Chhattisgarh, First Floor, Block-C, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶29

3 - Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board, Through Chairman, Vyapam Bhavan, North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶30

--- Respondents

¶31

For Petitioners	: Ms. Kajal Chandra, Advocate
For Respondents 1 & 2/State	: Mr. Anish Tiwari, Dy. Govt. Advocate
For Respondent No.3 in	: Mr. Arpit Parakh, Advocate on behalf of Mr.
WPS No.7983/2023	Animesh Tiwari, Advocate

¶32

(Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order On Board

¶33

16.06.206

¶34

3

¶35

1 . Since both the writ petitions involve an identical issue and the reliefs sought for therein are of same nature, they are being heard together and disposed of by this common order

¶36

2. The petitioners have preferred these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following relief(s):-

¶37

10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to the order by which the petitioners have been declared ineligible for the post of Teacher and Assistant Teacher on the ground that the petitioners are not having Teacher Eligibility Test Certificate.

¶38

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no.1 and 2 to include the Ex-Servicemen in the notification dated 10/01/2013 for granting 5 year relaxation to the Ex-Servicemen of Indian Army to clear the examination of Teacher Eligibility Test after joining the service.

¶39

10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no.1 and 2 to give appointment to the petitioners in pursuance of the advertisement dated 04/05/2023.

¶40

10.4 Any other relief(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) in favour of petitioner, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.

¶41

10.5 Cost of the petition.

¶42

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that pursuant to the advertisement (Annexure-P/5) issued on 04.5.2023, the petitioners, who are Ex-servicemen of the Indian Army, submitted their applications and participated in the recruitment process, however, their names were included in the list of ineligible candidates on the ground that they did not possess the requisite Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) qualification. Learned counsel further submits that vide Gazette Notification dated 10.01.2013 (Annexure-P/4), the Government of Chhattisgarh granted exemption from passing the TET to the

¶43

4

¶44

candidates belonging to ‘Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group’. Therefore, the petitioners submitted representation seeking similar consideration, however, the same has not been decided till date. Learned counsel further submits that being Ex-servicemen of the Indian Army, the petitioners are also entitled to a similar exemption as has been extended to persons belonging to the Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group . Hence, it is prayed that this petition may be admitted for hearing.

¶45

4. The State has filed its reply. Learned counsel for the State, referring to its reply submits that as per the provisions of Chhattisgarh School Education Services (Educational and Administrative Cadre) Recruitment and Promotion Rules 2019 , minimum qualification prescribed for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher and Teacher is that the candidate must have passed TET at the Primary Level and Upper Primary level respectively. Learned counsel further submits that the exemption from passing the TET has been granted by the State Government only to candidates belonging to the “Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group”, considering their extremely backward status and the fact that they reside in remote forest areas. It is contended that such exemption cannot be extended to the petitioners, as even members of the general Scheduled Tribes category are not entitled to the said benefit. It is further submitted that there exists no statutory provision or policy granting exemption from the TET qualification to Ex-servicemen of the Indian Army. Therefore, since the petitioners did not possess the requisite TET qualification, their names were rightly included in the list of ineligible candidates. Hence, this petition deserves to be rejected at the motion stage itself.

¶46

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

¶47

5

¶48

6. Since no rule or policy has been framed by the State Government granting exemption to Ex-servicemen of the Indian Army from passing the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) for appointment to the posts of Assistant Teacher/Teacher, the relief sought by the petitioners cannot be granted by this Court. Moreover, merely because the petitioners are Ex-servicemen of the Indian Army does not entitle them to claim parity with persons belonging to the Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group . The petitioners, who belong to the OBC category, cannot be equated with members of the Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group for whom a specific exemption has been granted by the State Government in view of their distinct socio-economic and geographical disadvantages.

¶49

7. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to admit these petitions. Accordingly, the same are dismissed in the motion stage itself.

¶50

Sd/-

¶51

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) JUDGE

¶52

Bini

Shyam Sundar Chandra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyam Sundar Chandra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Lakeshwari Sahu Vs Ramesh Kumar Sahu

Amrapali Sahakari Grih Nirman Sanstha Maryadit, Raipur Vs State of Chhattisgarh

National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Smt. Rewati Sahu

Ramkumar Aditya Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Manoj Kumar Thakur Vs South Eastern Coalfields Limited

Smt. Preeti Chandravanshi Vs Avadhesh Ku. Chandravanshi