1 2025:CGHC:45205 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4612 of 2017  Ayodhya Prasad Banjare S/o Radheshyam Banjare, Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Khairtal, Post Kataud, Tehsil And Police Station Nawagarh, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. The Secretary Panchayat And Rural Development Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh 2. The Chairperson General Administrative Committee, Zila Panchayat Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 3. Collector, Janjgir- Chama, Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 4. Ajit Basant, Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 5. G. S. Nayak, Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Nawagarh, District Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. Rajni Soren, Advocate For State : Mr. Vedant Shadangi, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No. 4 : Mr. Jitendra Pali, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 04. 09.2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):- “10.1 Issue a writ of certiorari setting aside charge- sheet dated 23.03.2017 and the disciplinary proceedings initiated by respondent no. 4 C.E.O. Zila Panchayat Janjgir-Champa; (1)(a) Set-aside order dated 05.09.2017 passed by the SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.09.08 14:56:24 +0530 2 C.E.O. Zila Panchayat Janjgir-Champa.” 10.2 Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to conduct an enquiry and initiate disciplinary action against respondent no. 5 C.E.O. Janpad Panchayat Nawagarh for taking malafide selective action against the petitioner; 10.3 Pass any other order the Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would argue that during the pendency of this petition, the disciplinary authority has passed final order in the departmental enquiry on 05.09.2017 and inflicted penalty of stoppage of one increment with non-cumulative effect. She would further submit that the departmental enquiry was not conducted in accordance with the law and the petitioner was not afforded sufficient opportunity of hearing. It is also contended that in the separate enquiry report, the petitioner was not found guilty. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondents would submit that the order is appealable according to the provisions of C.G. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993. 4. Heard. 5. Considering the fact that the order is appealable; therefore, I am not inclined to keep this matter pending. Accordingly, the instant petition is hereby disposed of. The petitioner is granted liberty to prefer a duly constituted appeal before the appellate authority within a period of 30 days, and in turn, the said authority is directed to decide the appeal expeditiously, in objective manner. The appellate authority shall consider the issue of limitation taking lenient view as matter remained pending before this Court for considerable period. 6. With the aforesaid observation(s), and direction(s), the instant petition is 3 hereby disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant