ARUN KUMAR PATHAK Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Refusal to grant the relief sought for by the appellant in his Writ Petition and consequently dismissing the same on the ground of delay and laches, made the appellant to approach this Court by filing this Writ Appeal.

(2.) Brief facts for disposal of this appeal are that on 26.11.2016 respondent- 2 issued an advertisement inviting applications from the eligible candidates for appointment on 18 different posts under the State services. Selection of eligible candidates is based on three phases; first stage being Preliminary examination (objective questions), followed by Main examination (subjective questions) and finally, interview. Pursuant to the said advertisement, appellant submitted his application form and he was issued admit card for appearing in examination. He succeeded in Preliminary examination and on that basis, participated in Main examination, which commenced in between 18.05.2017 to 21.05.2017. Result of main examination was declared on 17.11.2017 in which 863 candidates were short-listed and were called for interview. The appellant could not find place amongst successful candidates in main examination. On completion of selection process, final selection list was published on 30.12.2017. After completion of final selection process, petitioner not finding place in the final selection list, filed a Writ Petition on 28.11.2018 with following reliefs:

(3.) The said Writ Petition came up for hearing on 10.12.2018 and learned Single Judge after adverting to the dates and events ie commencement of recruitment proceedings, date of declaration of final result and considering the date on which the appellant made an application under RTI to get certain information with regard to his answer sheet from respondent- 2, as well the date of filing writ petition has held that the recruitment process has already been completed and selected candidates have been given appointments, therefore, it will be a futile exercise to grant relief to the petitioner/appellant, as claimed in the Writ Petition, declined to entertain the Writ Petition by impugned order.