The Chhattisgarh High Court has dismissed separate writ petitions filed by candidates seeking correction of their category from OBC (Creamy Layer) to OBC (Non-Creamy Layer) in the results of the Chhattisgarh Teacher Eligibility Test (TET)-2026, holding that the requests were made long after the prescribed correction window had closed.
Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal on Thursday rejected the petitions filed by Swati Verma of Bemetara district, Sunita Nayak and Supriya Prusty of Mahasamund, Sushma Sahu of Bilaspur, Devendra Kumar Damgare from Mohala-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, and Harish Kumar of Dhamtari district, observing that the candidates failed to avail themselves of the opportunity provided by the examination authority to rectify errors in their online application forms.
According to the petitions, the candidates claimed they had inadvertently selected the category of OBC (Creamy Layer) while filling out the online application form for TET-2026, despite belonging to the OBC (Non-Creamy Layer) category. They subsequently submitted representations to the examination authorities on March 20, 2026, seeking correction of the category in their results.
Counsel appearing for the petitioners argued that the mistake was inadvertent and requested the court to direct the authorities to consider their representations and amend the category details accordingly. Opposing the plea, counsel for the respondents submitted that the examination guidelines clearly specified that candidates could make corrections to their online applications between December 9 and December 11, 2025, following the closure of the application process on December 8, 2025. It was argued that the petitioners approached the authorities several months later and only after the declaration of results.
The respondents further contended that the issue had already been settled by earlier decisions of a Division Bench of the High Court, including rulings in writ appeals filed in 2024 and 2025, where similar requests for post-deadline corrections were not accepted.
After hearing both sides, the court noted that the representations seeking correction were submitted well beyond the stipulated correction period. The judge observed that the examination authority had provided a specific window for rectification of errors in the application form and that the petitioners failed to act within the prescribed timeframe.
Relying on the earlier Division Bench judgments and the examination instructions, the court held that there was no ground to direct the authorities to consider the representations at such a belated stage. The court remarked that the petitioners had lost the opportunity to correct their application details by not acting within the permitted period.
Consequently, both writ petitions were dismissed at the motion stage, with the court also disposing of the accompanying applications seeking urgent hearing and hearing during the summer vacation.
