2025:CGHC:16566 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(S) No. 1462 of 2021 1 - Shadab Ahmed Khan S/o Shri Mohd. Zafar Khan Aged About 48 Years R/o Ward No. 8, Takia Para, Durg, District- Durg (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Birendra Singh Barmate S/o Shri M.S. Barmate Aged About 47 Years R/o Mig 07, Sagardeep Uslapur, District- Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Commerce And Industries Department, Atal Nagar, Mahanadi Bhawan, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Centre For Entrepreneurship Development Madhya Pradesh (Cedmap) Through Its Executive Director 16a, Arera Hills, District Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh) 3 - Chhattisgarh Centre For Entrepreneurship Development (A Division Of Cedmap) Through Regional Coordinator, 46/2 Geetanjali Nagar Behind Bottle House, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh), 4 - State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Secretary Commerce Industries And Employment Department, Vallabh Bhawan, District Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh), 5 - Union Of India Through Secretary, Ministry Of Personnel, Public Grievances And Pensions, Department Of Personnel And Training. Lok Nayak Bhawan, New Delhi., District : New Delhi, Delhi Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Anoop Majumdaar, Advocate. For Respondent /State : Shri Vedant Shadangi, P.L. For Respondent No.4 : Shri Aditi Joshi, Advocate appeared on behalf of Ms. Madhunisha Singh, Advocate. For Respondent No.5 : Shri Bhupendra Singh, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order on Board 14/10/2025 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the following relief : (10.1) That the impugned notice of discontinuation of contract dated 05/02/2021 may be set aside / quashed and ASHISH TIWARI Digitally signed by ASHISH TIWARI Date: 2025.11.14 17:38:18 +0530 -2- respondents be directed to continue with the employment of the petitioner on contractual or regular basis in pursuance to its own resolution /order dated 01/01/2010. (10.2) That the respondents number 1 and 2 may be directed to not replace / substitute the petitioners with another set of employees for contractual employment in the CEDMAP. (10.3) That respondents may be directed to initiate steps for constitution of newly / successor Society for the VTP centers operative in the State of Chhattisgarh and further to regularize the services of the petitioners either under respondent number 2 or the newly formed society. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners were working with respondent No. 2 and 3 on contractual employment for the last so many years and suddenly the impugned inter-office correspondence was issued by the respondent No. 2 and 3 which is filed as Annexure P/1 dated 05/02/2021 whereby one month notice for discontinuation of the contract of the petitioner were directed. Challenging, the same this writ petition was filed and this Court vide its order dated 03/03/2021, directed the petitioner to submit a representation which may be sympathetically considered by respondent No. 2 He submits that the till date the representation submitted by the petitioner have not been considered by the respondent No.2 and 3. therefore, he prays making the order dated 03/03/2021 made absolute, this writ petition may be disposed of. 3. Not opposed by the other parties. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and peruse the record. 5. Be that as it may, this Court vide its order dated 03/03/2021 “Observed that given the said facts, till a final decision is taken by this Court, the petitioners as of now are directed to approach the respondent No. 2 in-respect-of their grievances, more particularly so far as the interim relief that could be provided to them by either retaining them in employment of the respondent No. 2 and giving them posting in the State of Madhya Pradesh or permitting them to continue in services till the State of -3- Chhattisgarh takes a policy decision in-respect-of the centers which were being operated in the State of Chhattisgarh. Let the petitioners in-addition to any representation that they have made, make a fresh representation to the respondent No. 2 who in turn shall consider the same pragmatically, sympathetically and also taking into consideration the past experience that the petitioners have gained by now. It is expected that the respondent No. 2 shall take a decision by next date of hearing”. 6. It is not brought to the notice of this Court that any decision in compliance of this order of this Court has been taken on the representation of the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is deem it appropriate to disposed of this writ petition permitting the petitioner to make fresh representation which was decided by the respondent No.2 and 3 in pragmatically, sympathetically or also taking into the consideration, the past experience of the petitioner. The petitioners are at liberty to make a fresh representation to respondent No. 2 and 3 within a period 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. On such representation having been made, the respondents No. 2 and 3/ competent authority shall decide the same within further period of 120 days from the date of receipt of representation in accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of this case. 7. With these observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. 8. All pending applcations are also disposed of. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge Ashish