1 2025:CGHC:59262 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7646 of 2018 1 - Madhukar Rao Chouhan S/o Late Shri G B Chouhan Aged About 59 Years R/o Near Magarpara Chowk Dr. Ambedkar Nagar, Bilaspur, Police Station Civil Line, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Chairman/ Secretary General Administration Department, Representation Committee, State Of Chhattisgarh Secretariat, Mahanadi Bhawan, Police Station And Post Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Energy, Secretariat, Mahanadi Bhawan, Police Station And Post Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Superintending Engineer (Electric Safety) And Chief Electric Inspector, Govt. Of Chhattisgarh, B- Block, 2nd Floor, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhishek Pandey, along with Ms. Varsha Sharma, Advocates For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sanjeev K. Agrawal, P. L. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput) Order on Board 05/12/2025 1. Challenge in this writ petition is to an order dated 26.10.2017 Annexure P-1 by which the petitioner was compulsory retired w.e.f 26.10.2017 on having been completed 50 years of age as on 19.07.2008. 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is bad in law because it has been passed without giving any opportunity of hearing and also assessment made in ACR has not been communicated to the petitioner, thus, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 3. Opposing the same, learned counsel for the State submits that a three member committee which includes Senior Officers of the respondents was constituted to assess the performance of the petitioner along with so many other persons. They have assessed the Annual Confidential Report of the petitioner as well as his performance and ultimately recommended compulsory retirement of the petitioner. After assessment of the petitioner’s service record it does not found suitable and therefore, order of compulsory retirement was passed. Later on, the petitioner made a representation to the authority which has duly been considered by further 3 members committee which included IAS Officers of Secretary Level and a detailed order was passed and the representation of the petitioner has been rejected. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. The impugned order indicates that the petitioner has completed 50 years of age on 19.07.2008 and the impugned order was passed on 26.10.2017 meaning thereby at the time the petitioner was aged about 59 years, the assessment made by committee, which is filed as Annexure R-1 also indicates that his service record was not upto the mark and he was recommended for compulsory retirement. Later on representation of the petitioner was also duly considered by three members committee. Relevant portion of rejecting the representation is quoted herein-below:- 4.1 श्री एन.आर. चौ हान, सहायक ग्रेड-दो क ईमानदोर एवं सनिनष्ठा क सदोहाजनक पाय गय। 4.2 श्री एमा.आर. चौ हान क गपानय चौरिरत्रावंली मा" मातांकन सहा नहा$ पाय गय। 4.3 श्री एमा.आर. चौ हान, सहायक ग्रेड-दो द्वार नि&न स्वंक( नितां एवं पा)वं* स)चौन दिदोय अनधि.क( तां रूपा स &र-&र अवंकश क उपाभोग करन क करण उनक निवंरूद्ध आदोश क्र. 63 दिदोनक 25.02.2008 क द्वार निवंभोगय जचौ सस्थि7तां क गय थी तांथी जचौ मा" दोषी पाय जन पार उनक दो &र्षिषी;क वंतांनवं(द्धिद्ध सचौय प्रभोवं स रक गय थी, तांत्पाश्चातां@ भो उनक द्वार शसकय कयA क प्रनितां दोधियत्वंहानतां, उदोशनतां एवं निनदोBशC क अवंहालीन तांथी नि&न स)चौन दिदोय कय*लीय स लीगतांर अनDपास्थि7तां रहान क प्रवं(त्तिF पाय गय । 3 4.4 श्री एमा.आर. चौ हान, सहायक ग्रेड-2 क निवंगतां 05 वंषीA क गपानय चौरिरत्रावंली क मातांकन क "अच्छा स कमा" पाय जन क करण उन्हा" अनिनवंय* सवंनिनवं(त्तिF दिदोय जन क अनDशस क गय । 4.5 सदोस्य सहा सयजक द्वार श्री एमा.आर. चौ हान, सवंनिनवं(F सहायक ग्रेड-दो स प्रप्तां अभ्यवंदोन दिदोनक 29.06.2018 मा" सम्मिLमालिलीतां प्रत्यक माग पार वंस्तांDस्थि7नितां स सधिमानितां क अवंगतां करय गय ज पारिरलिशष्ट-एक पार सलीग्न हाP। 4.6 उपारक्तांनDसर अभ्यवंदोन क प्रत्यक नि&न्दु पार प्रस्तांDतां वंस्तांDस्थि7नितां पार समाग्रे रूपा स निवंचौर निवंमाश* उपारतां सधिमानितां इस निनष्कषी* पार पाहुँVचौ निक श्री एमा.आर. चौ हान स प्रप्तां अभ्यवंदोन दिदोनक 29.06.2018 मा" उन्हा" दोW गय अनिनवंय* सवंनिनवं(त्तिF क निवंभोगय आदोश क स&. मा" कई नय तांथ्य सम्मिLमालिलीतां नहा$ हाP। अतांY पा)वं* मा" निवंभोगय छान&न सधिमानितां द्वार श्री एमा.आर. चौ हान क उनक सवं रिरकड* क माDल्यकन क आ.र पार उनक सवंय" निवंभोग क आवंश्यक नहा$ हान क आ.र पार उन्हा" दोW गय अनिनवंय* सवंनिनवं(त्तिF क निनण*य क यथीवंतां रखन पार सधिमानितां द्वार अनDशस व्यक्तां करतां हुँए अभ्यवंदोन क अमान्य निकय।" 6. It appears that proper deliberation was made by committee and subsequently in the representation made by the petitioner with regard to his service performance and this Court is not inclined to substitute its own finding setting aside the well reasoned finding recorded by the Committee as well as the committee rejecting the representation. 7. In view of the above, the writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) JUDGE Parul PARUL MITTAL Digitally signed by PARUL MITTAL Date: 2025.12.11 10:52:53 +0530