1 2025:CGHC:26569-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 383 of 2025 Mission Director, National Health Mission Through Dr. A.S. Kannoje, S/o Late Shri S.R. Kannoje, Aged About 53 Years, Working As Deputy Director, National Health Mission, Raipur Chhattisgarh, 4th Floor, Chhattisgarh Housing Board Premises (South East Corner), Sector-27, New Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh Present Address - 3rd Floor, Health Building, Sector-19, North Block, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - Deepak Dhara S/o Shri R.S. Dhara Aged About 44 Years R/o Near Telephone Exchange, In Front Of C.M.P.F. Colony Gate Phase-I, Plot No. 31, Police Station Sarkanda, Rajkishore Nagar, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 2 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Police Station New Raipur, Tahsil Raipur, Civil And Revenue District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Commissioner Directorate Of Health Services, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - Collector Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 5 - Chief Medical And Health Officer Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2025.06.23 17:02:17 +0530 2 For Appellant : Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate For State : Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, Additional Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 23.06.2025 1. Heard Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State. 2. Heard on I.A. No. 02/2025, which is an application for condonation of delay of 77 days has been filed by the appellant. 3. For the reasons assigned in the application (I.A. No. 02/2025), the same is allowed. Delay in filing the instant appeal is hereby condoned. 4. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, we proceed to hear the matter finally. 5. The present writ appeal is directed against the order dated 06.01.2025 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in WPS No.5328/2016, whereby the writ petition filed by respondent No.1 / writ petitioner was allowed. 6. Learned counsel appearing for private respondent No.1 submits that in pursuance of the order passed by the learned Single Judge in 3 WPS No.5328/2016, the authorities have passed the final order on 24.01.2025. He further submits that respondent No.1 has filed the contempt petition, in which notices have been issued and after that, instant writ appeal has been filed, which is not sustainable in the eyes of law. 7. After appreciating the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, learned Single Judge while relying upon the judgments rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matters of U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and others v. Brijesh Kumar and another, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2282 as well as Narendra Kumar Dubey v. State of Chhattisgarh and others passed in WPS Nos.6244/2009 and 6245/2009 vide order dated 24.01.2011, has allowed the writ petition filed by respondent No.1 observing as follows:- “10. Applying the aforesaid principles to the case in hand, I have no hesitation to hold that the order impugned terminating the services of the petitioner is ex-facie stigmatic in nature, as it has been passed without subjecting him to regular enquiry. The order impugned dated 25.07.2016 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Respondent No.2 is, therefore, liable to be and is hereby quashed. However, liberty is reserved to the concerned respondent authorities to take appropriate 4 steps, if so advised, after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and after following the principles of law, as mentioned herein-above. 11. The petition is accordingly allowed with the aforesaid observation. No order as to costs.” 8. Having considered the rival submissions of learned counsel for respondent No.1/writ petitioner as well as considering the fact that in pursuance of the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 06.01.2025, final order has already been passed on 24.01.2025, we are of the firm view that learned Single Judge has passed the impugned order with cogent and justifiable reasons and as such, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S) No.5328 of 2016 (Deepak Dhara v. State of Chhattisgarh and others). 9. In the result, the writ appeal lacks merit substance, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu