1 2025:CGHC:12756-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 184 of 2025 1 - Sanjeev Kumar Yadav S/o Permeshwar Yadav Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Mahapatre Colony Jashpur Nagar District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Commissioner Surguja Division - Ambikapur, Surguja Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Chief Executive Officer Jila Panchayat Jashpur District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Block Education Officer Bageecha District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 5 - The Assistant Commissioner Of Tribal Welfare Jashpur District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. B. P. Sharma, along with Mr. Sameer Oraon, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board 2 Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 18/03/2025 1. Heard Mr. B. P. Sharma, along with Mr. Sameer Oraon, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Govt. Advocate, appearing for the respondent/State. 2. The present writ appeal has been filed by the writ appellant, who was the writ petitioner, against the impugned order dated 23.01.2025 passed by learned Single Judge in WPS No. 3492/2018 whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade-III vide order dated 10.07.1998 and his service were regularized vide order dated 11.07.2001. He was promoted on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-II on 04.08.2014 and he was posted as Block Resource Person and was posted as Block Resource Centre, Manora. A complaint was made before the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Jashpur and Block Education Officer, Manora regarding misbehavior by the petitioner with the female employees and also illegality in distribution of place of posting under the scheme of utilization of the teachers. The show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 06.09.2014 and after filing of his reply the charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner on 22.01.2015 and departmental inquiry was initiated by appointing the Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Jashpur, District Jashpur as the Inquiry Officer vide order dated 18.05.2015. The respondent No.4/Block Education Officer was appointed as the person officer in the departmental inquiry proceeding. After completion of departmental inquiry proceeding a report was submitted on 09.06.2016 before the disciplinary authority and in turn the same was submitted before the General Administration Committee, Zila Panchayat, Jashpur and the same was approved for imposing punishment of the stoppage of 4 increments with cumulative effect vide order dated 18.09.2017 which was under challenge in the present writ petition and 3 the said writ petition is filed with the following prayer: i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire records relating to the petitioner's case. ii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/direction to quash the order dated 02.04.2018 and 18.09.2017 (Annexure P1 & P/2) passed by respondent No. 2 & No. 3. iii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a appropriate writ, directing the respondents to give all consequence benefit while quash the order dated 02.04.2018 and 18.09.2017 (Annexure P-1 & P/2) iii) Any other relief/reliefs which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be allowed." 4. After hearing the parties, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner which is under challenge in the present writ appeal. 5. Learned counsel for the writ appellant would submit that without affording proper opportunity of hearing, after supplying the report of departmental inquiry, the punishment order has directly been passed which is violation of principles of natural justice. The inquiry report was submitted on 09.06.2016 and directly order has been passed before imposing the penalty, the proper and sufficient opportunity should have been provided to the petitioner against whom the punishment proposed. The document have not been supplied to the petitioner before passing the order of penalty, therefore, the petitioner was deprived to defend his case properly which is 4 violative of the principles of natural justice. He would also relied upon the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Uttar Pradesh and Others vs. Rajit Singh 2022 (15) SCC 254 and order dated 19.07.2006 passed in Writ Petition No. 482/1999 passed by coordinate bench of this Court State of Madhya Pradesh vs. L L Bhandarka (2006 Lawsuit (Chh) 84). 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and submit that the sufficient and proper opportunity has been provided to the petitioner in the departmental proceeding and after full-fledged departmental inquiry the appellant was found guilty. He would also submits that the copy of the inquiry report and statements of the witnesses were provided to the petitioner and he was afforded due opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses. The inquiry report was produced before the General Administration Committee of Zila Panchayat Jashpur and on 12.09.2017 a resolution was passed imposing penalty of stoppage of 4 increments with cumulative effect and order passed on 18.09.2017. The departmental appeal filed by the petitioner has also been dismissed vide order dated 02.04.2018. He would also rely upon the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in Union of India and others vs. Constable Sunil Kumar, (2023) 3 SCC 622, and Chhatrapal vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another, (2024) SCC OnLine SC 146. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the document annexed with the writ petition as well as writ appeal. 8. From perusal of the entire material produced in the writ petition as well as writ appeal, it is quite vivid that the inquiry was conducted against the petitioner in accordance with the procedure prescribed with the same and there was no violation of principles of natural justice. The authorities after conducting the inquiry proceeding recorded the finding holding guilty of the writ appellant which ultimately produced before the General Administration Committee of Zila Panchayat Jashpur for imposing penalty and it has been resolved on 12.09.2017 to impose the penalty 5 of stoppage of 4 increments with cumulative effect and accordingly the order has been passed on 18.09.2017. The departmental appeal filed by the writ appellant has been dismissed vide order dated 02.04.2018. 9. From perusal of the impugned order, it would shows that the learned Single Judge has considered the ratio laid down in the case of Constable Sunil Kumar and Chhatrapal (supra) in which Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the finding recorded by the inquiry officer which was affirmed by the appellate court should not be interfered with unless it is found to be perverse finding recorded by the inquiry officer. From perusal of the entire material, we do not find any perversity in the impugned order passed by learned Single Judge which compels this Court to interfere in the petition. The judgment cited by learned counsel for the appellant is based on different footing and different consideration, therefore, no benefit can be extended on the basis of said judgment. 10. Upon perusing the impugned order, we noticed that the same has been rendered by the learned Single Judge with cogent and justifiable reasons. In an intra-court appeal, no interference is usually warranted unless palpable infirmities are noticed. Learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition by the impugned order has adverted to all the facts of the case. 11. In view of the above, We do not find any sufficient ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by learned Single Judge and the present writ appeal liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Alok ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2025.03.25 10:53:11 +0530