1 2025:CGHC:59551 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8061 of 2023 1 - Balak Bhargav S/o Late Nohar Bhargav Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Marukapa Post And Police Station S. Lalpur Block Lormi (Lalpur), District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Inspector General Of Police Raipur Range Durg, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Commandant 17th (Special Indian Security) Commandant Chhattisgarh Armed Force, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh 3 - Deputy Inspector General Of Police Range- Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate For State : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Government Advocate For Respondent No.5 : Mr. Navoday Singh, Advocate Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 08.12.2025 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the following reliefs:- ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 “10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and quash the impugned appeal order dated 23/06/2023 passed by the respondent no. 04 as well as quash the order dated 23/12/2022 passed to dismiss the service of the petitioner by the respondent no. 03 to. 10.2. That, this Hon'ble court may be pleased to direct to the respondent authorities petitioner at the post of Head Constable in the 17th (C.G. Sashastra bal) as posted earlier. 10.3. Any other relief, which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be allowed.” 2. Facts of the case in brief :- The present petition is filed challenging the impugned appellate order dated 23.06.2023 passed by Respondent No. 4, which has upheld the termination order dated 23.12.2022 issued by Respondent No. 3, resulting in the dismissal of the petitioner from the post of Head Constable, 17th Vahini, Chhattisgarh Sashastra Bal. Aggrieved by the termination, the petitioner had preferred a statutory appeal before Respondent No. 2, which was decided by Respondent No. 4 without proper appreciation of the material on record and without assigning adequate reasons, thereby confirming the termination. The impugned order is thus arbitrary, illegal, and violative of the principles of natural justice, and the appellate authority failed to consider the petitioner’s grounds in a proper perspective. In view of the above, the petitioner seeks the intervention of this Hon’ble Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for appropriate relief. 3 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to his ill health, he was unable to appear before the authorities and could not participate in the departmental enquiry conducted against him. The petitioner was suffering from Nerve Radiculopathy and, on medical advice, was required to rest from 26/02/2022 to 28/11/2022. Consequently, his failure to comply with the requisites of submitting documents and appearing before the authorities was solely on account of this medical condition. The medical certificates dated 26/02/2022, 28/04/2022, 28/06/2022, 28/08/2022, and 28/10/2022 are annexed hereto in support of his claim. Furthermore, the punishment imposed upon the petitioner falls within the category of harsh penalties and ought to have been mitigated, taking into account the petitioner’s long-standing service, prior unblemished record, and rewards received, which were not considered by the disciplinary authority while determining the quantum of punishment. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents jointly supported the impugned termination order and submits that the same is passed in accordance with the relevant rules applicable to the case of petitioner. Therefore, this petitioner is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents with utmost care. 4 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and having regard to the order dated 23.06.2023, it is evident that the said order passed by the respondent authorities is neither a speaking nor a reasoned order. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that the order dated 23.06.2023 is hereby quashed, and the matter is remitted to the appellate authority for reconsideration and disposal in accordance with law, by passing a speaking and well-reasoned order. 7. Accordingly, with these observation(s) and direction(s) this petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Saxena