1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3153 of 2018  Parshottam S/o Nathuram, Aged About 43 Years Caste Rajwar, Mechanical Helper, Category - 2, NEIS No. 22927818 Mahamaya Under Ground Mines, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Post Bhatgaon, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh, R/o Village Jarhi, Post And Police Station Bhatgaon, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh Pin 497235 ... Petitioner versus 1. South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Seepat Road, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh Through Managing Director 2. General Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bhatgaon Area, Post And Police Station District Surajpur Chhattisgarh 3. Mines Manager, Mahamaya Underground Mines, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Office Of The Mahamaya Underground Mines, Post Bhatgaon, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. K.R. Nair, Advocate For Respondents/SECL : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 15.04 .2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):- “10.1. That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records from the South Eastern Coalfields Ltd relating to the case of petitioner for its kind perusal. 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the charge sheet dated 03/01/2018 (Annexure P-1) issued by the respondents SECL and all subsequent proceedings initiated and continued against the petitioner. SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2026.04.15 14:22:39 +0530 2 10.3 To issue any other appropriate orders on directions to the respondents in the interest of justice in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Facts in brief are that the part of land admeasuring 0.34 hectare bearing survey Nos. 944 and 993/1 situated at village Jarhi, Patwari Circle No. 17, Tahsil Pratappur, District Surguja was owned by Shri Nathuram. The petitioner is adopted son of Nathuram. The petitioner was offered an appointment in lieu of land acquisition and resultantly, he was appointed on the post of Helper in the mechanical department vide order dated 30.10.1999. After 19 years of regular service, the SECL authorities issued article of charge making allegation that he secured employment providing forged documents in contravention to service rules. 3. Mr. Nair would submit that the petitioner is adopted son of Nathuram and there was no cheating or forgery on the part of the petitioner and false allegations have been made against the petitioner. He would submit that the respondent authorities with malafide intention and without providing relevant documents initiated a departmental enquiry and served article of charge. He would submit that the article of charge issued by respondents dated 03.01.2018 may be quashed. 4. On the other hand, Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate would submit that the petitioner represented himself as adopted son of Nathuram and secured employment and when this fact was detected by the department, article of charge was issued. He would submit that an enquiry was also conducted by the Additional Collector and findings recorded in that enquiry were stayed by the Commissioner, Division Surguja. He would submit that the petition is misconceived and deserves to be dismissed. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 6. Perusal of the documents would show that the petitioner was appointed in lieu of land acquisition. The petitioner has pleaded that he is an adopted son of Nathuram. The petitioner has placed sufficient documents to substantiate this fact. An article of charge has been issued by the SECL authorities ignoring the order of Commissioner, whereby, findings recorded by the Additional Collector in its enquiry were stayed. Further, as argued by Mr. Nair, documents along with enquiry report conducted by Additional Collector have not been provided to the petitioner. 7. Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the SECL authorities to provide all relevant documents along with enquiry report conducted by the Additional Collector to the petitioner before proceeding with the enquiry. The respondent authorities shall provide sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner strictly in accordance with the standing orders. The petitioner shall be permitted to examine his witnesses and would be at liberty to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses. The disciplinary authority shall take decision strictly in accordance with the law. 8. With the aforesaid observation(s), and direction(s), the instant petition is hereby disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE $iddhant