1 2025:CGHC:60398 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 749 of 2022 1 - Sukhanwar Hussain S/o Late Shri Tawangar Hussain Aged About 48 Years Working As Assistant Grade-Iii, R/o Behind Haidry Masjid Momin Para Ward Tatyapara Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary School Education Department Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Chhattisgarh Madarsa Board Through The Secretary, A-55, Gali No.4, Katora Talab, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 772 of 2022 1 - Nazir Ahmed Raza S/o Shri Zahir Ahmed Razvi Aged About 57 Years Working As Assistant Grade Iii, R/o Haji Gali, Sanjay Nagar Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary School Education Department Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Chhattisgarh Madarsa Board Through The Secretary, A-55, Gali No. 4, Katora Talab, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 768 of 2022 1 - Akram Beg S/o Shri Mirza Aslam Beg, Aged About 39 Years Working As Assistant Grade Iii, R/o House No. 15/1183, Rikhiya Para Near Gurunanak Chowk Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Digitally signed by HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Date: 2025.12.15 16:50:48 +0530 2 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary School Education Department Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Chhattisgarh Madarsa Board Through The Secretary, A-55, Gali No. 4, Katora Talab, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 773 of 2022 1 - Ashraf Ahmed S/o Shri Hameed Ahmed Aged About 47 Years Working As Assistant Grade Iii, R/o Mohamed Syed Steel Trunk Factory Momin Para Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary School Education Department Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Chattisgarh Madarsa Board Through The Secretary , A- 55, Gali No. 4 Katora Talab , Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 872 of 2022 1 - Smt. Farzama W/o Firoz Khan, Aged About 45 Years Working As Assistant Grade Iii, R/o Bayron Bazar Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary School Education Department Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Chhattisgarh Madarsa Board Through The Secretary, A-55, Gali No. 4, Katora Talab, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Kumar Dubey, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhishek Singh, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order On Board 11.12.2025 1. As identical issues are involved, these petitions are being heard and decided by this common order. 3 2. For the sake of convenience, the facts of WPS No. 749/2022 are taken as the lead case. 3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for the following relief(s); “10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of petitioner for kind perusal of this Hon'ble court. 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the order dated 28/12/2021 (ANNEXURE P-8) passed by the respondent No.1, in the interest of justice. 10.3 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the operation of order Annexure P-8 till final disposal of the present petition. 10.4 Any other relief, which may be deemed, 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.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners in all these writ petitions are employees of respondent No. 2, i.e., the Chhattisgarh Madarsa Board. Initially, they were engaged on daily wage basis and subsequently their services were regularized in the year 2016. Since then, they have been working on regular posts. Vide order dated 01.08.2016 (Annexure P/7) the services of the petitioners were regularized. However, vide impugned order dated 28.12.2021 (Annexure P/8) the regularization of the services of the petitioners has been set aside by respondent No. 1. It is further submitted that prior to passing the impugned order, no notice or opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioners. The impugned order entails civil consequences as the petitioners whose services had already been regularized, have been reverted to the status of daily wage employees. Therefore, it is contended that the impugned order deserves to be set aside. Apart from this, he submits that the services of the petitioners are governed by the Chhattisgarh Madarsa Board Chairman and Members (Terms and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2009, and as per Rule 4 clauses (f) and (g), the Madarsa Board is competent to regularize the services of the petitioners. On this ground also, the impugned order is liable to be quashed. 4 5. Learned counsel for respondent No. 1 supports the impugned order, however, he is not in a position to dispute that no notice or opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioners prior to issuance of the said order. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. Perusal of the records indicates that the petitioners were initially engaged as daily wage employees and their services were subsequently regularized vide order dated 01.08.2016 (Annexure P/7) by respondent No. 2. The impugned order dated 28.12.2021 (Annexure P/8) was passed after a lapse of approximately five years. This Court passed an interim order on 07.02.2022 in favour of the petitioners, and learned counsel Mr. Dubey submits that, by virtue of the said interim order, the petitioners are still continuing on their regularized posts. The records do not reflect that any notice or opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioners prior to passing of the impugned order (Annexure P/8). As a result of the impugned order, the status of the petitioners would be altered and they would be reverted back to the position of daily wage employees. Since no opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioners, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned order cannot withstand judicial scrutiny. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 28.12.2021 (Annexure P/8) is hereby set aside. Since the impugned order is being set aside solely on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice, respondent No. 1/State is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law after adhering to the principles of natural justice and after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge H.Ansari