Sanjit Kumar v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
Slhgie Bamh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WRIT PETITION (S NO. 3933 OF 2014 / ' PETITIONER:
Sanjit Kumar, S/o Shri Dilip 'Kumar, Aged _.
.
$- w about years, Resident of Village - Guruwaun Dabri, P.O.
- Lalbuf, Police .
w.
;'"" "wwj:
w Station - Lalpur, Tahsir -vLormi, District - Mungeli, Chhattisgarh
Versus
/ ~_/r RESPONDENTS:
1.
State of Chhattisgarh, Through Chief Secretary, Department of Revenue, Mantraiay, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
Zi/The Collector, District - Mungeli, ,wChhattisgarh.
3.
The Additional Collector, Mungeli, //Chhattisgarh.
_ \ 4.
The Land Record Officer, Office of Collector, Land Records Branch, District - Mungeli, Chhattisgarh.
WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF SUITABLE WRITS AND DIRECTIONS ~ R
1mm mwFCS2M3?23m 2017 mm(W) WWW w , mmwm '
mm m® w - aawmm SB Hon'ble Shrl Manlndra Mo an Shrlvastava J 24 12 14 S Jitea Gupta, coun for h petitr/s.
hrl ndr se te ione S'Y.Shakur, y.A.. for t.
hri.T DG he Stae With th onsnt of the prt the matte i ed finall.
e ce ai s, r s har y The peitner as file ts etiti grieve by ejectin of tio h d hi pon agd ro candidarifo pointen t po o wari initie vie tuer apmt o t e st f Pat atd d vertisement ed 5/01/..
ad dat The ise hich rise r'
neration in this titio is as su w as fo osid pen whether t etitoner in'
libiy uaIifican as he pi was h dg egiiit qtiO recbed us 10 of the a sen _ psri in clae dv rtlmet h titiner Witu di _u as obaind dioma in Te peo hot te h te pl cur ppn fr an Un ompte alicatio om C V Ra t iverSIty ue te advetis mnt eautiv ers Clas of h r e xhsely enumate elgibiy qualicatio T er is onl posssed f plm iiit ifn he petitio y se o dioa quacaon ro CRan U r an no from conze lifiti fm Vma ni esity d t regid '
vment echnic i stitutin Bar f Teial 'Eti Stte Tnical Unive Sit O DOECC SCIet ew ITI, Goern Polyt o od o chnc ducaon a ech y r Oy, N Del.
quan oses by the ne, ppetl hi The alifictio pss d petitior aarny there t'oe the ligi ity qualificans resibd erfo is non of e li tio pcre in 'clause 1O of the advertisement The submissmn of learned c unsel for the petitioner that one similarly Situated candidate was a lowed to partICIpate holding him eligible, does not help the petition r.
lf the petitioner does not hold
'
W W(W) mmm fmm wéam mmamm ~Qv %ad?manéai eligibility'qualifiCation as pr scribed in the advertisement no rehef can be granted by taking re ourse to Article 14 of the Constitution of cannot be enforced Thus If any allowed to appear In the examination even though not possessed of the quahfrcatron the Illegahty cannot be perpetuated by allowr g the petitioner to partrcrpate In the examination The argument, in d uise has been raised submitting that i the qualification of diplo m in computer application obtained from C V Raman Umverstty oug t to be treated as equivalent to diploma granted by other Institutions The submis3ion is liable to be rejected because the matter of eqw alence is an aspect for conSIderation for the experts and not for the 'ourts The petition has no e rit and is accOrdingly dismissed.
\ x Sd/- Manmdra Mohan Shnvastava Judge '
Deeptl i