1 2025:CGHC:4789 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 726 of 2025 • Deovrat Yamraj S/o Lt. Shri Pratap Singh Yamraj Aged About 54 Years Presently Posted As Sub-Engineer, At The Office Of Executive Engineer, P.W.D, Bridge Division, District Raipur, ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Public Works Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhavan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar District Raipur, C.G. 2. Deputy Secretary Public Works Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhavan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar District-Raipur, C.G. 3. Executive Engineer Public Works Department Bridge Division, District Raipur ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Addl. A.G. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 27/01/2025 Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash and set/aside the suspension order issued by the Deputy Secretary, Public Works Department, State of Chhattisgarh, vide dated 17/01/2025 [ANNEXURE P/1]. 10.3 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent State to grant any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in favour of the petitioner as per the facts & circumstance of the present case, in the ends of justice.” 2. Brief facts of the case is that in the course of his employment certain public construction and development works were given sanctioned under the supervision of petitioner which were construction work of an elevated bridge on Paload Nala on Tekari-Paload Marg and Construction work of Flyover Bridge at turning point near Shankar Nagar Chowk. On 01.04.2023 a chart has been provided at Serial No. 1 of that chart the name of the petitioner can easily be seen in-front of the construction work of bridge on Paload Nala on Tekari-Paload Marg. On 24.08.2023 the name of the petitioner can be seen at Serial No. 1 & 2 infront of construction work of bridge on Paload Nala on Tekari-Paload Marg and Construction work of Flyover 3 bridge at turning point near Shankar Nagar Chowk. Both the work was allotted to petitioner vide this aforesaid order. A letter was issued vide dated 03.01.2025 by the Executive Engineer, PWD, Bridge Division, Raipur to M/s Keshavdas Jaadvani directing that as per the instructions given by the Collector, District- Raipur some arrangements must be ensured at the worksite for the period from 03.01.25 to 07.01.25 for work to be carried out on the Mova Railway Overbridge. It is most specific to mention that such letter was specifically sent to M/s Keshavdas Jaadvani, thus it was the duty and obligation of Keshavdas Jaadvani to ensure such arrangements furthermore the aforesaid letter was endorsed by Tanmay Gupta, Sub-Engineer, PWD, Bridge-Division, Raipur, Rajeev Mishra, Sub-Engineer, PWD, Bridge- Division, Raipur, thus it proves that the concerned repairing work comes under the control and authority of these above-mentioned sub-engineers and not under the supervision of the petitioner. On 06.01.2025 the Executive Engineer again sent a letter to Roshan Kumar Sahu, SDO, PWD, Bridge-Division, Raipur and Tanmay Gupta, Sub-Engineer, PWD, Bridge-Division, Raipur, conveying that despite the Collector's instructions for traffic diversion from 03.01.2025 to 07.01.2025 the work traffic diversion and safety measure near repairing site of Mowa Over-bridge has been 4 unsatisfactory, causing severe traffic congestion and public outrage. In the recent meeting, the Collector expressed strong displeasure, directing officials to increase resources and skilled labour to complete the work ahead of schedule. Furthermore a warning was issued that failure to expedite the work will result in action against responsible officials and the contractor. The letter instructs immediate corrective measures, holding officials personally accountable for any further delay. That it is also most specific to mention again that the aforesaid letter directly addresses Roshan Kumar Sahu, SDO, PWD, Bridge-Division, Raipur and Tanmay Gupta, Sub-Engineer, PWD, Bridge- Division, Raipur, and in both the aforesaid letter dated 03/01/2025 and 06/01/2025 nowhere the name of petitioner is there as the repairing work of Mowa Over-bridge was not under the supervision or authority of the petitioner. The impugned order dated 17.01.2025 was issued by the respondent authority whereby they suspended the service of the petitioner along with some other officials for the reason of unsatisfactory work in repairing of Mowa Over-bridge which the petitioner has no relation at all, the repairing of Mowa over- bridge by putting bitumen on the road was under the supervision and authority of other Sub-Engineer and the petitioner has nothing to do with it, still the respondent 5 authorities have blatantly suspended petitioner with no application of mind. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing for some time submits that he may be granted liberty to file an appeal against the order impugned by which he has been suspended. According to him, the suspension order is totally in violation of the settled principles of law as the person against whom the charges are leveled. However, the petitioner has been made a prey and he has been suspended. 4. No objection from other side. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the fact that there lies an appeal the petitioner is directed to prefer an appeal before the appellate authorities and the appellate authority is directed to consider and decide the appeal in accordance with law within a period of 30 days from the date of production of this order along with copy of appeal. 7. With this observation and direction, the instant petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat 6 Raghu Jat