Pramila Mali vs Chhattisgarh Vyavasayik Pariksha Mandal (CGVYAPAM)

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner appeared in Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) conducted by respondent No.1/VYAPAM in the year 2022. At the time of submission of her application form online, petitioner inadvertently put mark in “Other Backward Class Category (Creamy Layer)” instead of “Other Backward Class Category (Non Creamy Layer)”. Petitioner belongs to OBC Category (Non Creamy Layer). On declaration of result, petitioner came to know that she was not considered as OBC Category (Non Creamy Layer) candidate. Upon enquiry, it revealed that she was treated as “OBC Category (Creamy Layer)” candidate. Immediately, thereafter petitioner submitted representation before respondent-authority on 28.10.2022, but till date the said representation has not been considered and decided. He submits that a direction be issued to respondent-authority to consider and decide representation submitted by the petitioner at the earliest.

Learned counsel for respondents submits that petitioner submitted on-line application, as stated by counsel for petitioner, she himself opted “Other Backward Class Category (Creamy Layer)”, hence, her candidature was considered according to details given by her in application. He also contended that along with writ petition, petitioner submitted her 'social status certificate' issued by Competent Authority of the year 2004. As per requirement, candidates are required to submit recent social status certificate issued by competent authority with application form for considering 'whether candidate comes within non-creamy layer or not'. He also contended that if petitioner submits her latest social status certificate before the authority along with representation, the same will be considered and decided expeditiously.

Counsel for the Respondents submits that since the claim of the petitioner is only for participation in the elgibility test, the Respondents are considering the claim of such candidates with permissible rectification.

At this stage, counsel for petitioner submits that in view of objection raised by counsel for respondents, petitioner may be permitted to file fresh representation along with recent social status certificate, for which some time may be granted to petitioner.

Heard counsel for parties and perused record of writ petition.

Considering facts and circumstances of case, nature of grievance, submissions of counsel for parties, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at the motion stage itself without going into merits of claim of petitioner, directing respondent to decide the representation of petitioner.

In view of above, petitioner is directed to file fresh representation before the respondent-authority along with her social status certificate issued by the Competent Authority within a period of six weeks from today. On making such representation, respondent-authority shall consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law within a further period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of representation.

With above observations and directions, writ petition stands disposed of.