1 / 4 2025:CGHC:41722 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4416 of 2025 1 - Shri Chandramohan Sharma S/o Rajkumar Sharma Aged About 41 Years R/o Uday Nagar, Ward No. 02, Kanker, District - North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) 2 - Shri Yasin Karani S/o Abdul Gaffar Karani Aged About 54 Years R/o Sanjay Nagar Kanker District - North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Petitioners versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Women And Child Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Department of Women And Child Development Mahanadi Bhawan, Indrawati Bhawan Naya Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) 4 - Chief Executive Officer Jila Panchayat Kanker District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) 5 - District Programme Officer Women and Child Development Department Kanker District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) 6 - Smt. Reena Lariya W/o Shri Awadhesh Lariya Aged About 47 Years R/o Near Honda Showroom Janakpur Ward Tikrapara, Kanker Police Station City Kotwali Kanker District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Shikhar Bakhtiyar, Advocate For State : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, PL ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.08.20 10:44:17 +0530 2 / 4 (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 19/08/2025 1. By way of the instant petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- 10.1 That this Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to set aside the reinstatement order of the respondent no. 6 dated 02/07/2025. 10.2 That any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper may also be granted in favor of the petitioner safeguarding her interest. 2. The brief facts of this case are that one Smt. Reena Lariya (Respondent No.6 herein) filed a writ petition WPS No.4683 of 2023 challenging the the order dated 12.6.2023 issued by respondent No.3/ Collector, District Uttar Bastar, Kanker whereby the she was removed from the post of ‘District Child Protection Officer (DCPO)’ Kanker, Chhattisgarh on the ground that she was negligent in the discharge of her duties, wherein this Court allowed the said writ petition and observed thus in para 8 & 9 which are reproduced hereinbelow:- 8) Taking into consideration the facts discussed above and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Hari Ram Maurya (supra) and K. Ragupathi (supra), the order passed by respondent No.3 dated 12.6.2023 is not sustainablein the eyes of law and therefore, the order is hereby quashed. However, this order would not prevent the respondents from taking action in accordance with the law. 9) With the aforesaid observation(s), the present 3 / 4 petition is allowed. No cost(s). 3. The petitioners have filed the instant petition being aggrieved with the order passed by the Respondent No.3 on 02/07/2025 whereby Respondent No.6 has reinstated the Respondent No.6 to the Post of District Child Protection Officer. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that pursuant to the complaints lodged by the petitioners alleging serious misconduct and irregularities by Respondent No.6 a departmental enquiry was conducted against her wherein charges were framed against her and adverse orders were passed. He would next contend that this Court has quashed the disciplinary order but has not directed her reinstatement leaving the matter to the discretion of Respondent authorities and the respondent authorities without considering the judicial order passed the impugned order permitting Respondent No.6 continuation, therefore, the instant petition deserves to be allowed. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and would submit that the petitioners have no locus to challenge the order of reinstatement of the Respondent No.6, therefore, the instant petition is liable to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the documents with utmost circumspection. 4 / 4 7. From perusal of the documents it is apparent that Respondent No.6 was removed from the post of ‘District Child Protection Officer (DCPO)’ Kanker, Chhattisgarh on the ground that she was negligent in the discharge of her duties and she challenged her removal by filing a writ petition bearing WPS No.4683 of 2023 and this Court has allowed the said writ petition and quashed the removal order of the Respondent No.6 and in pursuance of the said order the Respondent No.6 has been reinstated on 02nd July, 2025. It is pertinent to mention here that the petitioners are complainants who made complaint against the Respondent No.6 and this Court has quashed the order of removal of Respondent No.6, therefore, the petitioners have no locus to challenge the order of reinstatement of Respondent No.6. 8. Accordingly, the instant writ petition being devoid of merits is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu