1 2025:CGHC:56411 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6092 of 2023 1 - Vishwanath Dhruw S/o Shri Bhagirathi Dhruw Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Amalidih, Post- Kurda, Police Station- Dadhi, Tahsil And District- Bemetara (C.G.), Present Address- Jail Line, Central Jail Bilaspur (C.G.). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Home (Jail) Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). 2 - The Director General Prisons And Correctional Services Chhattisgarh, Head Quarter- Prisons And Correctional Services Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.). 3 - The Jail Superintendent Central Jail Bilaspur (C.G.). ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rishi Rahul Soni, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Shakib Ahmed, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 19/11/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to this case from possession RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 of the respondents for it's kind perusal; 10.2 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ/order/direction and quash/set-aside the order dated 02.02.2023 (Annexure P/1) passed by the respondent no.2 and furthermore the appeal (Annexure P/3) preferred by the petitioner may kindly be allowed by quashing/setting aside the order dated 13.05.2022 (Annexure P/4) passed by the respondent no.3; and 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioner has preferred the present petition challenging the order dated 02.02.2023 passed by respondent No. 2, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed and the order dated 13.05.2022 passed by respondent No. 3 has been affirmed, through which the penalty of withholding one increment with cumulative effect was imposed upon the petitioner. The impugned order dated 02.02.2023 is wholly arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to law, warranting interference by this Hon’ble Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, after advancing arguments at some length, submits that, at the very least, the petitioner may be granted a measure of relief by modifying the nature of the punishment imposed. It is urged that the punishment, which has presently been awarded in cumulative form, be reconsidered and 3 suitably altered to a non-cumulative form, so as to mitigate its severity while still ensuring that the ends of justice are duly met. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner, contending that no case whatsoever is made out for grant of any indulgence by this Court. It is submitted that the impugned action has been taken strictly in accordance with law, after due consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances, and therefore warrants no interference. The counsel further asserts that the petitioner has failed to demonstrate any procedural irregularity, legal infirmity, or perversity in the order under challenge, and as such, the prayer for modification or relaxation of the punishment deserves to be rejected outright. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the rival submissions and upon due appreciation of the material placed on record, this Court is of the view that the limited relief sought by the petitioner merits acceptance. While the punishment imposed upon the petitioner has been upheld as justified in principle, the manner of its execution in cumulative form appears unduly harsh in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 7. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and to ensure proportionality in the disciplinary consequence, the petition is allowed to the extent that the punishment awarded to the petitioner shall stand 4 modified from cumulative to non-cumulative, without otherwise disturbing the substantive findings recorded by the competent authority. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat