1 2025:CGHC:37673 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5570 of 2023 1 - S.S. Dohare S/o Late Umrao Singh Dohare, Aged About 65 Years R/o P-2a/315, Sector-27, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Forest, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Principal Chief Conservator Of Forest, Aranya Bhawan, North Block, Sector -19, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chief Conservator Of Forest, Durg Circle, District Durg Chhattisgarh. 4 - Divisional Forest Officer, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgoan Chhattisgarh. 5 - Divisional Forest Officer, Surajpur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh. 6 - The Director, Directorate Of Treasury, Accounts And Pension, Block -A, First Floor, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manish Nigam, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Ashutosh Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 31/07/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1. That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to immediately release all the retiral dues the petitioner including Encashment, Family Welfare Fund, Group Insurance Scheme, Pension, Gratuity, GPF and pay a penal interest there upon @18% per annum till the date of payment. 10.2. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as it may deems fit and appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case. 10.3. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to award/grant cost of the petition to the petitioner.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioner has served in the Forest Department for about 35 years, during which he was posted in various districts, including remote areas and consistently upheld the integrity of the department. Throughout his tenure, there was not a single complaint regarding his conduct, and he discharged his duties with utmost sincerity and dedication. He has retired from his service on 31.12.2020 from 3 the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest, Rajnandgaon Forest Division, District- Rajnandgaon. During his service period, he was posted in District Surajpur in 2016, where a show cause notice was issued to him by the Chief Conservator of Forest, Surguja Circle on 07.05.2016. Thereafter, petitioner has replied to the notice on 16.05.2016, and his explanation was found satisfactory, after which no further action was taken. In 2017, he was transferred to Rajnandgaon, and before his retirement, the department initiated the process of collecting no dues certificates from all the districts he had served. On 26.11.2020, the Divisional Forest Officer, Rajnandgaon sought such a certificate from the Divisional Forest Officer, Surajpur. However, on 01.12.2020, a departmental inquiry regarding misappropriation was proposed, and an amended charge sheet had been submitted by the Chief Conservator of Forest, Surguja Circle, vide its letter dated 27.08.2020. Despite this, the petitioner was neither issued a charge sheet nor subjected to any departmental inquiry or criminal trial prior to or on the date of his retirement. On 26.12.2020, due to the delay in settlement of his pension and retiral benefits, the petitioner applied for anticipatory pension, which was eventually granted provisionally. Furthermore, an application under the Right to Information Act revealed that no charge sheet had been issued to the petitioner before his 4 retirement, confirming that there was no legal ground to withhold his retiral benefits. However, despite these facts, the respondents have failed to release the petitioner’s full retiral benefits, prompting the filing of this petition. Hence, this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner respectfully submits that a notice dated 07.05.2016 was issued to the petitioner, purportedly in contemplation of a departmental enquiry. However, despite the lapse of considerable time since the issuance of the said notice, no charge-sheet has been served upon the petitioner, nor has any further steps been taken to initiate or proceed with the departmental enquiry. He further submits that the petitioner had duly responded to the said notice, yet subsequent thereto, the proceedings have remained in abeyance without any justification or explanation. In view of this inaction and unexplained delay, the notice dated 07.05.2016 has become infructuous and otiose in law. It is a settled principle that mere issuance of a notice, without culmination into a formal charge sheet or enquiry, cannot be allowed to continue indefinitely, particularly when it adversely affects the rights of the employee. Learned counsel further submits that solely on account of the pendency of this unacted- upon notice, the retiral dues and post-retirement benefits legally payable to the petitioner have been unjustly withheld. The petitioner, having superannuated from service, is entitled to the 5 release of all his retiral benefits including gratuity, pension, leave encashment, and any other service-related dues. The withholding of such benefits on the basis of a stale and inactive notice is arbitrary, unjust, and violative of the petitioner's rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. In light of the above, it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue appropriate directions to the respondent authorities to forthwith release the entire retiral benefits and service dues of the petitioner, which are being withheld without any cogent basis or subsisting departmental proceeding. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that the issuance of the impugned notice was a consequence of certain allegations that had been levelled against the petitioner at the relevant time. It is further contended that these notices were part of a preliminary inquiry mechanism and not indicative of any conclusive findings or determination of guilt. Significantly, despite the issuance of the notices, no charge sheet has been filed against the petitioner till date, and no further proceedings or coercive steps have been initiated pursuant thereto. As such, the proceedings have remained dormant, and there has been no progression of any nature that would adversely affect the legal rights or reputation of the petitioner. In view of the same, it is the respectful submission of the State that 6 the present writ petition is premature and does not warrant any interference by this Hon’ble Court at this juncture. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case and further considering the fact that no charge sheet has been issued against the petitioner and no departmental enquiry has been initiated till date, there exists no legal impediment in granting the petitioner his lawful retiral benefits. Therefore, the respondent authorities are directed to release all pending retiral dues forthwith and ensure that the petitioner is paid his full pension along with arrears without any further delay. All consequential benefits, including pensionary entitlements, shall be extended to the petitioner strictly in accordance with the applicable Pension Rules. This is to uphold the principles of natural justice and to prevent unwarranted hardship to the petitioner in the absence of any formal charges or disciplinary proceedings. 7. This be done within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 8. With this observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat