1 2025:CGHC:45423 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3420 of 2023 Mukesh Khatik S/o. Late Shri Sohanlal Khatik, Aged About 35 Years, R/o. Sub Inspector/executive B.S.P. Bhilai Address - Gram Mandapiya Thana Mangrop Zila Bhilwada Rajasthan ... Petitioner versus 1 - Director General, Central Industrial Force Headquaters Block No. 13, C.G.O. Complex Lodhiroad New Delhi 2 - Inspector General, Central Industrial Security Force Central Sector Headquater Bhilai, District - Durg, Chhattisgarh 3 - Deupty General Inspector, Central Industrial Security Force Unit B.S.P. Bhilai Headquater Bhilai, District - Durg Chhattisgarh 4 - Commandant, Central Industrial Security Force Unit B.S.P. Bhilai District - Durg Chhattisgarh 5 - Assistant Commandant/ Administration, Central Industrial Security Force Unit B.S.P. Bhilai District - Durg Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Abdul Moin Khan, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Abdul Wahab Khan, Advocate For Respondents : Ms. Sweta Rai, Central Govt. Counsel on behalf of Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Deputy Solicitor General YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2025.09.04 18:49:31 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 04.09.2025 1 The petitioner has filed this writ petition with the following relief(s):- “10.1 यह कि उत्तरवादी मा 05 द्वारा जारी प्रश्नाधीन आदेश परिरशिशष्ट पी-02 ो किनरस्त/ अपास्त किया जायें। 10.2 यह कि उत्तरवादीगण ो किनद#शिशत किया जावे कि वे याचि%ाता& ो संगम किवश्वकिवद्यालय भीलवाड़ा राजस्थान से अपराध किवचिध में एल.एल.एम. रने हेतु किनयमानुसार अनुमचित एवं अवाश देने ाय&वाही शीघ्र रें। 10.3 यह कि, अन्य अनुतोष जो माननीय न्यायालय उचि%त समझे उत्तरवादीगण से याचि% ो किदलाया जावे।” 2 Brief facts of the case, are that the petitioner is serving as a Sub Inspector/Executive in the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), BSP Unit, Bhilai, under Force No. 110201872. He belongs to the Scheduled Caste category and has been continuously serving under the respondents since 27.07.2011. He has completed more than 11 years of service and is due to retire in the year 2048. During the academic session 2019–2022, the petitioner had duly obtained departmental permission to pursue the LL.B. course, which he successfully completed, securing 64.86% marks. Thereafter, the petitioner intended to pursue higher studies, namely LL.M. in Criminal Law, from Sangam University, Bhilwara, Rajasthan, commencing from the current academic session. For this purpose, he applied on 10.12.2022 for 3 leave approval and a “No Objection Certificate” from the respondents. However, the petitioner’s request was summarily rejected by the impugned order (Annexure P/2), without assigning any justifiable reason. Aggrieved by the arbitrary denial of permission to pursue higher education, the petitioner has preferred the present petition. 3 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is presently posted at CISF Unit, WCL, Chhindwara, M.P. and intends to pursue his LL.M. degree at the Rao Shankar Shah University, Chhindwara (M.P.) itself, which, according to him, will not interfere with the discharge of his official duties. It is, therefore, prayed that the respondents may be directed to grant him necessary permission to prosecute his LL.M. studies at Chhindwara. He further submits that the petitioner can be assigned duties in a schedule, which would not interfere with his academic commitments, so that neither his service obligations nor his studies are adversely affected. 4 Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents/Union of India submits that, looking to the nature of work assigned to the petitioner as well as the timing of the LL.M. course, it appears that the same may conflict with his official duties. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner reiterates that the timing of the LL.M. course and his official duties are distinct and shall not overlap, 4 and further assures that the petitioner shall endeavor to perform his duties strictly in accordance with law. 5 Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, and taking into account that the college where the petitioner seeks admission is situated at Chhindwara itself where he is presently posted, this Court is of the view that the respondents are required to examine the case of the petitioner in a pragmatic manner. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to consider the petitioner’s request afresh, and if he satisfies the requisite conditions, he may be permitted to prosecute his LL.M. studies at Rao Shankar Shah University, Chhindwara (M.P.). 6 With the aforesaid observations/directions, instant writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh