Multiple petitioners from various districts of Chhattisgarh challenged an advertisement dated 04.05.2023 issued by CGVYAPAM for 12,489 teacher posts, which allocated 62–68% of vacancies to Scheduled Tribes based on a reservation notification dated 29.11.2012 and model rosters that had already been declared unconstitutional by a Division Bench of the Chhattisgarh High Court on 19.09.2022. The petitioners argued that the State could not indirectly revive a quashed reservation framework through a fresh advertisement, and that the Supreme Court's order dated 01.05.2023 — which permitted pending recruitments to continue subject to the final outcome of the SLPs — did not validate the unconstitutional reservation arrangement. The High Court, relying on the binding 50% reservation ceiling established in Indra Sawhney and affirmed in Dr. Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil, held that a pending SLP does not obliterate the binding effect of the High Court's earlier judgment quashing the notification, and that the roster is merely an implementing instrument and cannot independently sustain an unconstitutional reservation. The Court quashed the advertisement to the extent it incorporated the unconstitutional reservation arrangement, but declined to order wholesale cancellation of appointments already made, directing instead that all future appointments and promotions must contain a condition making them subject to the final outcome of the Supreme Court proceedings.