1 2025:CGHC:13663 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8568 of 2019 1 - Radhe Singh S/o Devraj Singh Aged About 32 Years Working As Rojgar Sahayak At Gram Panchayat Dharmi, Janpad Panchayat Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Panchayat And Gramin Vikas Vibhag, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector Balrampur-Ramanujganj, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Chief Executive Officer Zilla Panchayat Balrampur- Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 5 - Program Officer Janpad Panchayat Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Akath Kumar Yadav, Advocate For State- Respondents No.1 & 2 For Respondent No. : : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Government Advocate Mr. Arjun Lal Singroul, Advocate SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 21.03.2025 1. Heard. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging order dated 24.09.2019 (Annexure P/1), passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Ramchandrapur/ respondent No.3, whereby the services of the petitioner has been terminated. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed on the post of ‘Gram Rojgar Sahayak’ vide order dated 20.07.2007 (Annexure P/3), on contractual basis for a period of one year, which was continued from time to time. Later on, the petitioner was terminated from service vide the impugned order dated 24.09.2019 (Annexure P/1) on the grounds of misconduct, and no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner. However, pursuant to 3 the interim order of this Court dated 17.10.2019, the petitioner is still working as ‘Gram Rojgar Sahayak’ on contractual basis. 4. Be that as it may, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and especially considering the fact that the effect and operation of impugned order dated 24.09.2019 (Annexure P/1) has already been stayed for a very long time by order of this Court dated 17.10.2019, this petition, at this stage, is disposed of by setting aside the impugned order dated 24.09.2019 (Annexure P/1), for being passed in violation of principles of natural justice. However, the respondent/competent authority is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as the contractual period has already expired. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated herein-above. No cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Saxena