1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4720 of 2023 1 - Chandramani Karsh S/o Shri Dev Narayan Karsh, Aged About 26 Years (Constable, No. 663) R/o Ward No. 20 Ram Sagar Para Mudpar Tahsil Janjgir District Janjgir Champa Chhattigsarh. At Present R/o Village Bhadra Para Balco Ps Baloc District Korba Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Home (Police) Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya Atal Nagar New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Director General Of Police Headquarters, Block No. 4 Sector - 19, Near Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur Atal Nagar New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Inspector General Of Police, Bilaspur Range District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Superintendent Of Police, Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh. 5 - The Sho Deepika Ps Deepika District Korba Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dheerendra Pandey, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Government Advocate ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 19.12.2025 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the following relief(s) :- “10.1. That, the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records of the case. 10.2. That, the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to set aside the dismissal order as well as dismissal regarding the both appeal. 10.3. Cost of the petitioner petition may also be granted to the petitioner. 10.4. Any other relief, which may be deems it fit by this Hon, ble Court just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be provided in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Facts of the case :- The petitioner was initially appointed as a Constable in the respondent department and continued to serve in that capacity till his dismissal, being posted at the Reserve Center, Korba, District Korba. On 02.04.2018, respondent No. 4 issued a charge-sheet against the petitioner and other similarly placed employees alleging arbitrariness, assault on a vehicle driver while on duty, consumption of alcohol, gross negligence in ensuring the safety of the accused persons, and tarnishing the image of the department before the general public, a copy whereof is filed as 3 Annexure P/2. Subsequently, on 17.08.2019, respondent No. 5 addressed a letter to the CSP, Darri, District Korba, referring to a prior communication dated 30.07.2018 and stating that the petitioner had denied the allegations and prayed for condonation of the act in view of his family circumstances, enclosing the memo received from Police Chowki Morga, PS Bango, District Korba, and forwarding the matter for necessary action (Annexure P/34). Pursuant thereto, a departmental enquiry was initiated wherein an Inquiry Officer was appointed, witnesses were examined, the statement of the petitioner was recorded, and thereafter the enquiry report along with the entire material was submitted before respondent No. 4 on 22.03.2022 (Annexure P/4). Alleging violation of the Madhya Pradesh/Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1965, and despite the petitioner denying the charges and seeking personal hearing, the disciplinary authority, without issuing any show-cause notice regarding the proposed punishment, passed the impugned order dated 17.09.2019 dismissing the petitioner from service (Annexure P/5). The departmental appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Inspector General of Police, Bilaspur, was dismissed vide order dated 02.06.2020, upholding the findings of indiscipline and tarnishing of departmental image and affirming the punishment of dismissal (Annexure P/6), whereafter the Mercy Appeal preferred before the Director General of Police, Raipur, was also rejected vide order dated 20.12.2022 on the ground of gravity of proved 4 charges and past service record, thereby affirming the dismissal of the petitioner from service (Annexure P/1). 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents have committed a grave error of law in passing the impugned order dated 20.12.2022, without properly considering and appreciating the applicable legal provisions and settled principles of natural justice. The departmental enquiry was conducted in a wholly one-sided manner, without affording the petitioner any reasonable opportunity to produce documents or evidence in support of his innocence. Though respondent No. 5 recorded statements of witnesses which contained material omissions and contradictions, the authorities failed to consider the same and proceeded to pass an arbitrary, illegal and mala fide termination order. The respondents further ignored the unblemished service record of the petitioner and imposed the extreme penalty without duly proving the charges framed against him, which renders the impugned action unsustainable. It is also significant that respondent No. 2, in the impugned order itself, has acknowledged that the allegation regarding consumption of alcohol could not be conclusively established, which clearly indicates that the order is founded on mere presumption and conjecture and therefore cannot stand in the eyes of law. The appellate and revisional authorities have mechanically affirmed the order of dismissal without independent application of mind and have merely reiterated the observations of respondent No. 4, thereby vitiating 5 the orders passed by them. As per Clause 213 of the Chhattisgarh Police Regulations, read with the C.G. Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1966, the procedure prescribed under the CCA Rules is applicable, as held by the Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in Krishnanarayan Shivpyare Dixit v. State of M.P., and the same has been blatantly violated in the present case. Further, in the absence of any specific provision in the Police Regulations regarding common proceedings, Rule 18 of the CCA Rules mandates lawful procedure, which has not been followed. The authorities have also failed to consider the petitioner’s satisfactory service record as required under Regulation 224 of the Police Regulations, and the punishment imposed is shockingly disproportionate, harsh and violative of Rule 226. The appellate authority has dismissed the appeal in a most mechanical manner without addressing specific grounds and without passing a reasoned and speaking order, thereby rendering the appellate order legally unsustainable. Hence, the impugned orders are arbitrary, illegal and violative of statutory provisions, deserving to be quashed, with liberty to raise additional grounds during the course of hearing. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent, at the outset, that the present petition, as framed and filed, is devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed. The petitioner, while serving as Constable No. 783, was issued a charge-sheet along with other delinquent employees for acts of serious misconduct, including assault on a vehicle 6 driver while on duty, negligence in ensuring the safety of the accused, consumption of alcohol, and thereby tarnishing the image and reputation of the police department before the general public. Upon receipt of his explanation, which was found unsatisfactory, a regular departmental enquiry (DE No. 14/2018) was initiated after serving the petitioner with the charge-sheet, list of documents and witnesses, and appointing a duly competent Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer. The Inquiry Officer, after conducting a fair, impartial and comprehensive enquiry and granting adequate opportunity of hearing and defence to the petitioner, submitted a detailed report dated 30.08.2019 holding the charges proved. Thereafter, the Superintendent of Police, Korba, issued notice to the petitioner calling for his representation, and despite adequate opportunity, the petitioner failed to substantiate his defence; consequently, by a reasoned order dated 17.09.2019, the Disciplinary Authority terminated his services. The departmental appeal preferred by the petitioner was duly considered and rejected by the Inspector General of Police, Bilaspur, vide order dated 02.06.2020, and the Mercy Appeal was also dismissed by the Director General of Police on 20.12.2022, after due application of mind and appreciation of the material on record. It is submitted that all proceedings were conducted strictly in accordance with law, ensuring compliance with principles of natural justice, the findings are supported by material evidence, and the impugned orders are reasoned and speaking; therefore, 7 the allegations of illegality, arbitrariness or mala fides are wholly misconceived and untenable, and the present petition merits outright dismissal. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record with due care. 6. Upon an overall consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced, and the material placed, this Court is of the considered view that no case for interference is made out at this stage. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the competent authority, if so advised, within a period of 15 days from today. In the event such representation is filed, the respondent authorities concerned shall consider and decide the same on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law, by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a further period of 60 days from the date of receipt of such representation. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the controversy. In case any party is aggrieved by the decision taken by the respondent authorities, it shall be open to such party to avail appropriate remedy in accordance with law. No order as to costs. 7. With these observations and directions this petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Saxena