1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPL No. 237 of 2018 1 - Malik Ram Sahu S/o Shri Purushottam Sahu, Aged About 53 Years R/o Village Deokirari, Post Bitkuli, Tahsil And Thana Bilha, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Water Resources, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Sub Divisional Officer, Manimata Bango Nahar, Sub Division No.-17, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate For State : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Agrawal, PL Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order on Board 27/11/2025 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner claiming following reliefs : 1. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to call for the entire record from the respondent authority as well as call for the records of the Case No. 43/ID Act/Ref./2018. 2. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to set aside the award dated 03.08.2018 passed by the learned presiding officer under the PAWAN KUMAR Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR Date: 2025.11.27 14:56:19 +0530 2 Industrial Dispute Act cum Labour Court, Bilaspur in case No. 43/ID Act/Ref./2018. 3. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to further hold that the action on the part of respondent in respect of termination/ retrenchment of the petitioner is illegal and contrary to the provision of Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. 4. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondent authority to reinstate the petitioner in service with all consequential benefit including back wages and continuity of service. 5. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to further direct the respondent authority to place/produce entire payment vouchers of the petitioner since September, 1990 till date of alleged termination i.e. 03.06.1995 for fair & final disposal of the instant writ petition. 2. While issuing notice, this Court ordered that status quo so far as the service of the petitioner is concerned as it exists today be maintained pending the writ petition before this Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the interim order passed by this Court on 30.11.2018, the petitioner is still in service. He further submits that return on behalf of respondents/State has been filed and according to paragraph No. 4, the service of the petitioner has been regularized and the order has filed as Annexure R-1. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner’s service has been regularized as per paragraph No. 4 of the return. 5. In view of above, this writ petition is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to file a fresh petition if any cause of action survives. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) JUDGE Pawan