1 2025:CGHC:55137 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 12794 of 2025 Tulsidas Manikpuri S/o Bhagwandas Manikpuri Aged About 58 Years R/o Gram Panchayat - Badegauri, Janpad Panchayat - Charama, District - North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, Kanker, District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) 3 - Deputy Director Panchayat Kanker, District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) 4 - Sub Divisional Officer Charama, District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Pratibha Sahu, Advocate For State : Mr. Khulesh Sahu, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 12.11.2025 1. The petitioner who was working as Secretary, Gram Panchayat Badegauri, Block Charama has filed the present writ petition challenging the recovery order dated 04.08.2025 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat North Bastar Kanker by which recovery to the tune of Rs. 1,14,442/- for irregularities alleged to have been committed by him while construction work has been ordered. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the order has been passed with notice without giving any opportunity of hearing and the impugned order has been passed in violation of principle of natural justice therefore the present petition is maintainable. BHUMIKA ANGARE Digitally signed by BHUMIKA ANGARE Date: 2025.11.20 11:49:47 +0530 2 3. Learned counsel for the State opposing the submission would submit that all this ground can be very well taken before the appellate forum as disputed facts are involved. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents place on record with utmost satisfaction. 5. Considering the submission that disputed facts against the petitioner with regard to measurement of cement and iron bar used during construction are involved and the same has to be ascertained which can be ascertained after some enquiry of facts before the appellate forum. 6. Accordingly, I am of the view that the writ petition is not maintainable at this juncture and the petitioner is at liberty to prefer an appeal before the appropriate forum wherein the petitioner shall be given opportunity of hearing. In turn the Appellate authority shall decide the appeal on the merit and neither the respondent nor the appellate authority will take a plea of limitation. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not commented on the merit of the case or all the contentions are left open which will be adjudicated and decided by the appellate authority in accordance with law. 8. With aforesaid observation and liberty granted in favour of the petitioner, present writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Bhumika