DIVYA SAHU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed seeking relief for a direction to the Respondents to consider the candidature of the Petitioner for the post of Rural Agriculture Extension Officer from the examination conducted in the year 2017.

(2.) Facts of the case are that an advertisement was issued by the Respondents for recruitment to the post of Rural Agriculture Extension Officer and the vacancies were for 650 posts. The Petitioner having a requisite qualification had applied for the said post and was also called upon for the written examination which was conducted by the department. Results were declared and the Petitioner got/secured 65.118 from the total marks and the her overall rank was 734. Her category rank was 414 and the female rank was 160 and in the female category rank she stood at Sl. No. 66. As the name of the Petitioner was reflected at Sl. No. 66 in the female category rank, the Respondent No.3 issued a letter calling for verification of the documents of the candidates whose name appeared between the female category rank 60 to 81 and had asked them to report for verification on 12018. The said letter was published in their official website. She did not appear in the said verification of documents held on 12018. She subsequently for the first time on 3.4.2018 moved a representation to the Respondents intimating the authorities that she was not properly intimated of the date of document verification and that she was also not well during the relevant period and therefore she could not attend the document verification on 12018 and therefore made a request for permitting her to appear in the next document verification. Meanwhile, the Respondents have now proceeded further with the recruitment process and have called upon the candidates in the female category rank between 82 to 111 for document verification on 9.7.2018. It is therefore that the Petitioner has now filed the present writ petition asking for a relief that she may be permitted to participate in the document verification program to be held on 9.7.2018 along with the candidates whose rank appeared between 82 to 111.

(3.) Contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner is that the Respondent authorities should have ensured that sufficient and clear intimation should had been sent to the Petitioner so far as the date of document verification is concerned. That, as she was not properly intimated of the same she could not appear on the date fixed. He further submitted that no prejudice whatsoever would be caused if the Petitioner is now called upon, as it is only the next batch which has now been called upon and there are many more batches to be called upon for document verification. He also submitted that let the Petitioner be permitted to participate in the document verification, subject to the outcome of the present writ petition. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner also banked upon Annexure P-7 that was an interim order granted in another writ petition, i.e., the order dated 25.8.2014 passed in W.P.(S) No. 765 of 201