1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 379 of 2025 1 - Pankaj Kumar Gupta S/o Deo Prashad Gupta Aged About 38 Years R/o House No. 150/1, School Colony, Bhanora, Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector Cum District Programme Coordinator (Mahatma Gandhi Narega), District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh 3 - Sub-Divisional Officer Rural Engineering Services, Sub Division- Balrampur, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh 4 - Chief Executive Officer District Panchayat, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh 5 - Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat, Balrampur, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner :- Mr. Ishan Verma, Advocate For State :- Mr. Khulesh Sahu, P.L. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 16.01.2025 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking following reliefs:- VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 “10.1. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to Declare the termination order dated 24.12.2024, issued by the Respondents against the Petitioner, as stigmatic in nature (ANNEXURE P-1); 10.2. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction quashing the order dated 24.12.2024 issued by the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Balrampur, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj against the Petitioner (ANNEXURE P-1); 10.3. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to Direct the Respondents to reinstate the Petitioner in service with all consequential benefits, including back wages, continuity of service; 10.4. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to Grant any other relief(s) that this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity;” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been removed from his service as Rozgar Sahayak by a stigmatic order dated 24.12.2024, however, neither any opportunity of hearing was given nor any enquiry was conducted before passing such order, as such, the impugned order is not in accordance with law. He places reliance upon an order passed by this Court in the matter of Yaad Das Sahu vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others in WPS No.8212/2023 decided on 03.01.2025 and is praying that the respondent authorities may be directed to give notice to the petitioner, take reply and after conducting enquiry, they may pass necessary orders. 3 4. Learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the impugned order has rightly been passed and it requires no interference. He submits that though the order has been passed, however, notice was given to the petitioner and opportunity of hearing was also given to him which is apparent from the impugned order. He further submits that since the order has been passed by the respondent No.4, as such, they are answerable to the queries made by the respondent No. 5. 5. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available in record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, and further considering the fact that the issue involved in the present case is similar to that of the issue involved in WPS No. 8212/2023, accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in light of the order passed on 03.01.2025 in WPS No. 8212/2023 (Yaad Das Sahu vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others). 7. However, the respondents No. 3 & 4 are at liberty to approach this Court, if so desire. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha