-1- 2025:CGHC:41171 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2307 of 2021 Mohan Singh Yadav S/o Late Sukman Ram Yadav, Aged About 37 Years Working As Assistant Grade-Iii At Primary Health Center, Hitamaita, Block- Lohdiguda, District- Baster at Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1- State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2-The Collector, Baster, District- Baster At Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh. 3- The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Baster, District- Baster At Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Block Medical Officer, Block- Lohdiguda, District- Baster At Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Somkant Verma, Advocate For State : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 14.08.2025 1) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1. That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to quash order impugned dated 30.03.2021 passed by the respondent no.3 (so far Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE -2- as concerned to the petitioner). 10.2. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit.” 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was initially appointed to the post of Class-IV Employee under respondent No.3 on 24.06.2004. Subsequently, he was promoted to the post of Assistant Grade-III by the competent authority in the year 2020. However, without affording any opportunity of hearing, the promotion order was canceled by respondent No.3 vide order dated 30.03.2021. He contends that the concerned authority ought to have provided sufficient opportunity of hearing before canceling the promotion order, as it has civil consequences. 3) On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner and submits that there were other similarly situated employees, and an enquiry was conducted against them with regard to irregularities in their promotion. He further submits that pursuant to directions issued in WP(S)/9778/2019 and WP(PIL)/91/2019, a committee was constituted to conduct an enquiry, wherein it was found that the petitioner and other similarly situated persons were wrongly granted promotion to the post of Assistant Grade-III. On the basis of findings recorded by the committee, the concerned authority issued the impugned cancellation order. 4) Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents on the record. 5) From a perusal of the documents, it appears that after the petitioner's promotion to the post of Assistant Grade-III, certain writ petitions, including a Public Interest Litigation, were filed before this Court challenging such promotion. Pursuant to the orders passed in those petitions, a committee was constituted to enquire into the matter regarding promotion granted to the petitioner and other similarly situated employees. The allegations made in the complaint were found to be substantiated, and subsequently, the promotion -3- order of the petitioner was canceled by respondent No.3 vide the impugned order. 6) Though an enquiry committee was constituted pursuant to directions issued by High Court and irregularities were found in the promotion process by the said committee, but at the same time, it is equally true that the petitioner was not afforded any opportunity of hearing before the issuance of the impugned order dated 30.03.2021 and the same is in violation of the principles of natural justice. 7) Further, the interim order dated 13.04.2021 is operating in favour of the petitioner, and the petitioner is still discharging the functions of Assistant Grade- III. This indicates that the cancellation order has been kept in abeyance pending the outcome of this petition. 8) Taking into consideration the fact that the cancellation of the promotion order has serious civil consequences affecting the petitioner's service career, this Court finds that the impugned order dated 30.03.2021 suffers from the vice of violation of the natural justice principles; thus, the impugned order dated 30.03.2021 (Annexure P-1) is hereby quashed. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. 9) Respondent No.3 would be at liberty to pass a fresh order after affording a due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nadim