Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 308 (CHH)

KU. DIPIKA LOHANI v. STATE OF C. G.

2009-11-18

SATISH K.AGNIHOTRI

body2009
ORAL ORDER Heard. 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the place of appointment of the petitioner as per the O.M.R. (Optical Mark Reader) para 23.4 (Annexure P/I). The petitioner further seeks a direction to the respondents to consider her representation (Annexure P/4), in accordance with law. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner submitted an application for appearing in the Chhattisgarh State Shiksha Karmi Selection Examination. 2008 for the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-III. As per the instructions (OMR) the petitioner filled in column No. 23.4 as Code No. 208 i.e. Janpad Panchayat, Kasdol, District Raipur. On declaration of result the place of appointment of the petitioner was shown as Dantewada. Thereafter, the petitioner made representations on 6.11.2008 and 5.5.2009 but of no avail. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in the application form (Annexure P/l) in the column 23.3 - City for Examination, the petitioner filled up the Code No. 28 (Dantewada) and in column 23.4 - For which Janpad Panchayat the application is made, the petitioner filled up the Code No. 208 (Janpad Panchayat Kasdol, District Raipur). Therefore, the selection of the petitioner ought to have been made for the Janpad Panchayat -Kasdol, instead of Janpad Panchayat- Dantewada. 4. Clause 23.3 and 23.4 of the OMR instructions are relevant and quoted below: 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 submits that since the petitioner had chosen the city for examination as Dantewada by mentioning Code No. 04 in Clause 22.2 and Code No. 28 in Clause 23.1, she should have written the Code No. 125 in Clause 23.4 which relates to the option as to for which Janpad Panchayat the application is filled up. Shri Agrawal submits that the place mentioned at clause 22.2 for the Shiksha Karmi Grade II, will be treated as application for appointment in the same district. But in clause 23, there is a separate column where the petitioner has a choice to specify in the application Janpad Panchayat for which the applicant wishes to make application. Thus, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief. 6. But in clause 23, there is a separate column where the petitioner has a choice to specify in the application Janpad Panchayat for which the applicant wishes to make application. Thus, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief. 6. In reply, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that the candidates were given option to fill up the Code No. of the city from where they wish to appear in the examination, likewise, they were given option to fill up the Code No. of the Janpad Panchayat for which their application should be treated after selection. 7. Clause 22 of the OMR application provides that if a candidate is applying for selection on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade II, he should indicate the city/district of the examination in clause 22.2. In the said column, the petitioner has indicated 04 i.e. Dantewada. In clause 23, it was provided that the applicant who is applying for Shiksha Karmi Grade III, he should fill up the column i.e. in clause 23.3, examination city, therein, the petitioner has filled up the code 28 i.e. Dantewada. In clause 23.4, the petitioner should indicate the code of Janpad Panchayat for which he is making the application. The petitioner has mentioned 208. Code 208 stands for Kasdol in district Raipur. In the note at the bottom of the instructions, it was stated that if the applicant is making an application for more than one grade, he should specify only one examination centre. In the present case, having regard to the prescription in clause 22 wherein it is stated that the application of a candidate shall be treated as the application for the same city wherein he has chosen centre of examination, the application of the petitioner for selection in Shiksha Karmi Grade II would be Dantewada. In case of Shiksha Karmia Grade III, clause 23.4 specifies the code of Janpad Panchayat for which the petitioner has made application. In the case on hand, the petitioner has given 208 code i.e. Janpad Panchayat, Kasdol, District Raipur, in the application form. 8. In case of Shiksha Karmia Grade III, clause 23.4 specifies the code of Janpad Panchayat for which the petitioner has made application. In the case on hand, the petitioner has given 208 code i.e. Janpad Panchayat, Kasdol, District Raipur, in the application form. 8. Thus, the respondent authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment in case of Shiksha Karmi Grade II for district Dantewada and in case of Shiksha Karmi Grade III, for Janpad Panchayat, Kasdol, District Raipur, if the petitioner is found selected on merit for the area as stated above, a proper order may be passed on consideration. 9. The petition is allowed to the above extent. No order as to costs. Petition Allowed.