1 (WPS No. 3513 of 2020) CGHC010188152020 2026:CGHC:37316 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3513 of 2020 1 - Krishna Kanhaiya Shanu S/o Bhagirati Shanu Aged About 42 Years Working As Line Paricharak, Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited Under Distribution Centre Sarsiwa, District Raipur Chhattisgarh R/o Gidhpuri Marg, Village Ghotiya, Tahsil Palari, District Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited Through Executive Director, Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Additional Chief Engineer Office Of The Executive Director, Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, (Raipur Gramin Area) District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Executive Engineer Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, Kasdol, District Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) For Petitioner :- Mr. Nasimuddin Ansari, Mr. Roshan Kunj, Mr. Ajay Kumar Sahu and Mr. Riyazuddin Sheikh, Advocates For Respondent:- Mr. Varun Sharma, Advocate ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Digitally signed by ADITI DIWAN KAIWART Date: 2026.08.20 18:16:40 +0530 2 (WPS No. 3513 of 2020) SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 20.08.2026 1. This writ petition is directed against order dated 31.01.2020 (Annexure P/2), passed by respondent No.2/appellate authority, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner against order of punishment has been rejected. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the appellate authority vide order dated 31.01.2020, dismissed the petitioner’s appeal against order of punishment by passing an unreasoned and non-speaking order. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and this writ petition deserves to be allowed. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent supports the impugned order. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the material available on record with utmost circumspection. 5. A careful perusal of the impugned order would show that the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed by the appellate authority vide order dated 31.01.2020 (Annexure P/2), without assigning any reason and by 3 (WPS No. 3513 of 2020) passing a non-speaking order, whereas, it ought to have been decided in light of Rule 27(2) of the CCA Rules, 1966, which apparently has not been done in this case. 6. In that view of the matter, the non-speaking and unreasoned order dated 31.01.2020 (Annexure P/2) is hereby quashed. The matter is remitted to the appellate authority for considering and deciding the appeal of the petitioner afresh by passing a reasoned and speaking order, within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge @d!t!