1 2025:CGHC:34353-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 493 of 2025 1 - Rakesh Jaiswal S/o Kishmish Prasad Jaiswal, Aged About 51 Years Occupation In-Charge Circle Coordinator (Mandal Sanyojak) Raipur, R/o Village And Post Pandri Block Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Tribal Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - The Collector, Balrampur District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh 4 - The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Balrampur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh 5 - The District Education Officer, Balrampur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 6 - Shri Santosh Singh, In-Charge Circle Coordinator (Mandal Sanyojak) Rajpur District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Shri Rahul Mishra, Advocate. For State : Shri Shashank Thakur, Dy. Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ramesh Sinha, CJ Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board Digitally signed by INDRAJEET SAHU Date: 2025.07.21 16:42:52 +0530 2 21.07.2025 Per, Ramesh Sinha, CJ. 1 This writ appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order darted 25.03.2025 passed by learned Single Judge in WPS No.1987 of 2025, dismissing the writ petition filed by him seeking permission to direct the respondent authorities to permit him to continue his duties as In-charge Circle Coordinator. 2 Facts of the case is that while working as Teacher, by order dated 15/03/2024, the additional charge of Circle Coordinator, Rajpur was given to the appellant, however on 05/02/2025 a show cause notice was issued to the appellant alleging that he is not performing his duties properly and asked him to submit his response, to which he submitted his reply and denied the allegations levelled against him, however, the authority finding his reply unsatisfactory withdrew the additional charge given to him. The writ petition filed against the said order of withdrawal of power stood dismissed. Hence this Writ Appeal. 3 We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the order impugned. 4 Indisputably, the appellant’s substantive post is Teacher and only charge of Circle Coordinator was given to him however, he could not perform the duties in a proper manner. Even in respect of death of one student he could not submit proper response and as 3 such additional charge was withdrawn from the appellant and handed over the said charge to other officer. The order under challenge before the learned Single Judge was only withdrawal of the charge of Circle Coordinator which was given to him in administrative exigency. The learned Single Judge has rightly dismissed the petition holding that employer has every right to take decision for smooth functioning of the Department on administrative interest. Even otherwise, one cannot claim as a matter of right to remain incharge of any post till eternity. 5 For the foregoing reasons, the Writ Appeal being sans merit deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice inder