The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that an authority cannot abandon an ongoing recruitment process without a rational and legally sustainable justification. It quashed the cancellation of a 2022 recruitment at Government Medical College, Ambikapur, and the decision to shift it to the Chhattisgarh Professional Examination Board (VYAPAM).
Justice Bibhu Datta Guru directed the authorities to resume the recruitment from the stage at which it was stopped and complete it within three months.
Background
The college issued advertisements on 20.07.2022, followed by amended advertisements in 2023, for posts at Rajmata Srimati Devendra Kumari Singhdev Government Medical College, Ambikapur. According to the petitioners, a merit list was prepared and candidates were called for document verification on 23.08.2023. The State said that schedule was cancelled on 21.08.2023 for unavoidable reasons.
At a General Body meeting on 23.04.2025, the Dean said more than one lakh applications had been received and the process would take considerable time. The meeting decided to cancel the advertisements and recruit through VYAPAM. Ten candidates challenged this decision.
Arguments
Advocate Pawan Shrivastava, appearing for the petitioners, said they were not claiming an absolute right to appointment. Their grievance was that the process could not be discontinued arbitrarily or on facts not supported by the official record. He pointed to a letter dated 19.06.2025 from the Dean to the Commissioner, Medical Education. It showed 10,374 applications for 63 Class III posts and 44,961 for 385 Class IV posts, a total of 55,335 for 448 posts. He also argued that a fresh process could prejudice candidates on account of age limits.
Government Advocate Suyashdhar Badgaiya, for the State, argued that the petitioners had no indefeasible right to appointment and that the authority could change the mode of recruitment. He submitted that the decision was taken in the larger institutional interest and was not driven by mala fides or favouritism.
Court’s Findings
Relying on East Coast Railway v. Mahadev Appa Rao, Shankarsan Dash v. Union of India and Tej Prakash Pathak v. Rajasthan High Court, the Court said participation in a selection does not confer a right to appointment. However, it held:
“However, the absence of such a right cannot be understood to confer upon the State an unrestricted discretion to abandon a recruitment process without a rational and legally sustainable justification.”
The Court noted that the Dean’s letter came after the meeting and could not conclusively establish the figures before the General Body. It also said it could not infer that the figure in the minutes was deliberately incorrect. However, the State had not reconciled the gap between “more than one lakh” and 55,335 applications, leaving the stated basis for cancellation materially unexplained.
The Bench added that the General Body resolution did not settle the legality of the decision, observing:
“A resolution cannot immunise administrative action from judicial review where the factual foundation for the decision is materially questioned.”
The Court said that VYAPAM may be justified in an appropriate case on grounds of uniformity, transparency or efficiency. But it held that “the mere desirability of conducting recruitment through VYAPAM does not, by itself, justify abandoning an ongoing selection process.” It noted that the State had identified no illegality or procedural defect in the earlier process. It also found that the State had not shown why that process could not be completed, given that it had progressed beyond the initial stage.
Outcome
The Court quashed the General Body decision of 23.04.2025, insofar as it cancelled the advertisements and discontinued the recruitment, along with the consequential communication dated 19.06.2025. The authorities were directed to verify eligibility and documents, determine comparative merit, and issue appointment orders to eligible candidates under the applicable rules, all within three months. The writ petition was allowed without costs.
Case Title: Aditya Saini and Others v. State of Chhattisgarh and Others
Case No.: WPS No. 8553 of 2025
Bench: Justice Bibhu Datta Guru
Date: 28.10.2026
