VIKAS RAJ Vs. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Grievance is against the course pursued by the learned Single Judge whereby interference was declined and the writ petition was dismissed, holding that the challenge raised against the process of selection after participating in the said process is not correct or sustainable in view of the law declared by the Supreme Court in this regard.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the Appellant and the learned standing counsel for Respondent No.1, as well as the learned counsel representing Respondent No.2.

(3.) The sequence of events reveals that Annexure P/1 advertisement was issued by the 1st Respondent on 04.11.2018 for appointment to the post of Assistant Grade-III. With the involvement of the 2nd Respondent, a written test was conducted on 27.01.2019 and a skill test in Hindi and English typing followed on 13.05.2019. It was thereafter, that Annexure P/5 select list was published on 18.07.2019 and appointment was being made from the said select list. Since the Appellant could not find place in Annexure P/5, but for getting included in Annexure P/6 waiting list, he approached this Court challenging the course and proceedings, particularly, the preparation of the rank list, alleging that even the candidates who participated only one of the two skill tests and bagging the minimum extent of marks (either in English typing or Hindi typing) were placed in the select list and were fortunate to be appointed.