YOGENDRA KUMAR vs THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — WPS/413/2025

Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: CGHC010017962025

Filing Number

WPS/1027/2025

Filing Date

10-Jan-2025

Registration No

WPS/413/2025

Registration Date

14-Jan-2025

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

SERVICE MATTERS ( 6 )

Sub-Category

SELECTION, APPOINTMENT & RECRUITMENT INCLUDING EXAMINATION, INTERVIEW. ( 614 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.YOGENDRA KUMAR

    Adv. Shalvik Tiwari,Ashwin Panickar,Ashwin Panickar, ,Ashwin Panickar

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.

  2. 2.The Director

  3. 3.Ekta Sharma

    Adv. A.V.SHRIDHAR,ASHUTOSH PANDEY Himanshu Sinha HEMANT DAS MANIKPURI

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 04-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem SahuView PDF

    Case Summary: WPS 413/2025 The High Court of Chhattisgarh adjourned the petition filed by Yogendra Kumar challenging a recruitment decision for the post of Training Officer, Secretarial Practice (English). The petitioner claims his certificate (Annexure P-6) is equivalent to the required qualification, but no supporting documentation was produced by either party. The court directed all parties to submit on record the subjects and training requirements for Secretarial Practice (English) by the next hearing and consolidated this case with WPS 3377/2025. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-Feb-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

  4. 15-Jan-2025

    For Orders [On Office Notes]

    Additional Registrar(j)

  5. 10-Jan-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPS/413/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WPS 413/2025 The High Court of Chhattisgarh adjourned the petition filed by Yogendra Kumar challenging a recruitment decision for the post of Training Officer, Secretarial Practice (English). The petitioner claims his certificate (Annexure P-6) is equivalent to the required qualification, but no supporting documentation was produced by either party. The court directed all parties to submit on record the subjects and training requirements for Secretarial Practice (English) by the next hearing and consolidated this case with WPS 3377/2025. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case