1 2025:CGHC:33527-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 421 of 2025 1 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, Bilaspur, Nehru Chowk, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Collector-Cum-Authorized Officer Zila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, Bilaspur, Nehru Chowk, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Appellants versus 1 - Sheikh Jalaluddin S/o Sheikh Samsuddin Aged About 30 Years R/o H.No. 12/921, Maudhpara Raipur Tehsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary Department Of Co- Operative Societies, Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Po And P.S. Rakhi, Dist Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Registrar Co-Operative Societies, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Distt Raipur CG 4 - Joint Registrar Co-Operative Societies Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Commissioner (Rev.) Bilaspur Division Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Chairman/ Board Of Directors Zila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, Bilaspur, Nehru Chowk, Bilaspur, Dist Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Appellants : Mr. Akash Pandey and Ms. Seema Verma, Advocates For Respondents/State : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Dy. A.G. For Private Respondents : Mr. Mateen Siddiqui and Mr. Navin Shukla, Advocates Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA 2 Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 17 . 07 .202 5 1. Heard Mr. Akash Pandey and Ms. Seema Verma, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the State/respondents and Mr. Mateen Siddiqui and Mr. Navin Shukla, learned counsel for the private respondent / writ petitioner. 2. The present intra Court appeal has been filed by the appellants against the order dated 12.03.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No. 3771 of 2020 (Sheikh Jalaluddin vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others), whereby, the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner / respondent No.1 herein was allowed by the learned Single Judge. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the parties submit that the issue involved in this writ appeal has already been considered and decided by this Court vide judgment dated 10.06.2025 in WA No. 318 of 2025, whereby the Division Bench of this Court has held as under:- “16. For the foregoing reasons and also considering the fact that the identical writ appeal has already been decided, the instant writ appeal is partly allowed and the impugned order dated 12.03.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge so far as it relates to the direction to respondent authorities to reinstate the services of the petitioner without back wages is concerned, the same is set aside. 3 17. Further considering the fact that writ petitioner / respondent No.1 and other similarly situated writ petitioner, who are 29 in number, are not in service since, 2015, we direct the appellants herein/respondent Nos. 5 & 7 therein to conclude the fresh proceedings, as has been ordered by the learned Single Judge, as early as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” They further submit that since the facts and issue involved in the present case is identical to that of WA No. 318 of 2025, this appeal may also be partly allowed in the same terms. 4. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the materials on record, it is evident that the facts and issue involved in this appeal is identical to WA No. 318 of 2025, as such, this Court deems it appropriate not to take a view other than what has been taken in WA No. 318 of 2025. 5. Accordingly, the present appeal is partly allowed in terms of the order dated 10.06.2025 passed in passed in WA No. 318 of 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra