Satyavijay Singh Chauhan v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 459 of 2020

1. Satyavijay Singh Chauhan, S/o Shri Bhogendra Singh Chauhan, Aged About 37 Years, Resident Of Near Tribal Girls Hostel, Devnagari, Mahdevghat Road, Raipura, Post Office- Sundarnagar, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Principal Secretary, Department Of Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Police StationRakhi, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Collector, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

3. District Education Officer, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgar ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Thakur, Advocate For State : Mr. Sudeep Verma, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 03.12.2020

1. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is the decision of the respondents whereby they have decided to drop the entire recruitment process which they had initiated vide advertisement dated 28.12.2013.

2. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner's only request as of now is that since the respondents had already conducted the recruitment process and undertaken the skill test. Only the results were to be declared and the request at this juncture is for a direction to the respondents to declare the results.

3. Perusal of the pleadings attached to the writ petition would show that the order passed by the respondents way back on 07.02.2019

(Annexure P-7) whereby it has been revealed that the authorities had taken a decision as early as on 07.02.2019 cancelling the entire recruitment process on the ground that subsequent development that transpired in as much as many of the posts have been filled up from transfer in the offices and also that by afflux of time, the validity of the selection process itself got over. The fact which needs consideration at this juncture is that though the order has been specifically passed by the respondent authorities dropping the entire selection process, the said order is not under challenge in the present writ petition. In the absence of any challenge to the said decision of the respondents, the relief sought for in the present writ petition cannot be granted at this juncture.

4. Moreover what needs to be appreciated is the fact that the petitioner has only participated in the recruitment process, no substantive right has been created in his favour. It is settled position of law that merely participating in the recruitment process itself would not create any indefeasible right in favour of the petitioner. Moreover, in the instant case, the respondents even before the recruitment process was complete and even before declaring the results of the selection process they have taken a decision to drop the recruitment process. Thereby for the aforesaid reasons, this Court finds that no strong case made out in the instant case.

5. The writ petition, therefore, being devoid of merits deserves to be and is accordingly rejected.

Sd/- P. Sam Koshy JUDGE Rahul