KHUSHBU DEVANGAN vs PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT Advocate - A.G., ,JITENDRA PALI,Pranjal Shukla,ANIKET VERMA,Shantam Awasthi,Vivek k. Shrivastava,SHRIKANT KAUSHIK — WPS/1363/2023

Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 15th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010056552023

Filing Number

WPS/3299/2023

Filing Date

13-Feb-2023

Registration No

WPS/1363/2023

Registration Date

14-Feb-2023

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

SERVICE MATTERS ( 6 )

Sub-Category

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

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

15-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 22-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KHUSHBU DEVANGAN

    Adv. Tarendra Kumar Jha,AAMIR KHAN,AAMIR KHAN, ,SUMIT SINGH RATHORE,Bhaskar Jha,Narayan Prasad Thakur,TAPAN KUMAR CHANDRA,AAMIR KHAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT Advocate - A.G., ,JITENDRA PALI,Pranjal Shukla,ANIKET VERMA,Shantam Awasthi,Vivek k. Shrivastava,SHRIKANT KAUSHIK

  2. 2.State of Chhattisgarh

    Adv. A.G.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

    Summary: The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed three consolidated writ petitions challenging a Family Court recruitment process. The court held that while the number of examination questions was reduced from 50 to 25, this administrative modification did not vitiate the selection as total marks remained unchanged and the adjustment was uniformly applied to all candidates without causing demonstrated prejudice. The court further rejected the challenges on two grounds: (1) petitioners participated in the process without raising timely objections, thus invoking principles of waiver and estoppel; and (2) the petitions suffered from fatal defects due to non-joinder of successful candidates whose rights would be directly affected, making the petitions unmaintainable under established judicial review principles for recruitment matters. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 11-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

  4. 27-Feb-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

  5. 26-Feb-2026

    Motion Hearing Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

  6. 11-Feb-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

  7. 30-Jan-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

  8. 19-Dec-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

  9. 03-Nov-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

  10. 18-Apr-2023

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan PandeyView PDF

  11. 18-Apr-2023

    Motion Hearing Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas

  12. 13-Mar-2023

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar VyasView PDF

  13. 16-Feb-2023

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem SahuView PDF

  14. 16-Feb-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  15. 13-Feb-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPS/1363/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed three consolidated writ petitions challenging a Family Court recruitment process. The court held that while the number of examination questions was reduced from 50 to 25, this administrative modification did not vitiate the selection as total marks remained unchanged and the adjustment was uniformly applied to all candidates without causing demonstrated prejudice. The court further rejected the challenges on two grounds: (1) petitioners participated in the process without raising timely objections, thus invoking principles of waiver and estoppel; and (2) the petitions suffered from fatal defects due to non-joinder of successful candidates whose rights would be directly affected, making the petitions unmaintainable under established judicial review principles for recruitment matters. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case