1 2025:CGHC:7474 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 994 of 2025 1 - Smt. Jasmine Raj Singh W/o Late P. R. Singh Aged About 52 Years R/o Mohta Colony, Patpar, Bhatapara, Tehsil- Bhatapara, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector, Balodabazar, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh. 3 - District Education Officer, Balodabazar, District : Balodabazar- Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh. 4 - District Election Officer Balodabazar, District : Balodabazar- Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/ State : Mr. Akhilesh Kumar, G.A. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 12/02/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following relief:- “10.1 That, the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to quash/set-aside the order dated 23-01-2025 passed by respondent No.4 with a direction to reinstate petitioner with present place posting of the petitioner. 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court further pleased to grant such other relief(s) as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice and fair play.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioner is initially appointed in the year 1993 in Education Department as Assistant Teacher and the appointment order was issued by respondent authorities. On 23-11-2019 passed by respondent No.3, the petitioner was posted as Head Master at Government School, Mata Devalaya, Bhatapara, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) where she was working with utmost sincerity and honesty. At present the process of Nagarpalika Parishad Election 2025 is going on under which Government School, Mata Devalaya, Bhatapara, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) has been notified as a polling 3 station. On 23.01.2025 when the nomination papers are being taken in the office of Additional Collector it was alleged that petitioner entered the room of returning officer and misbehaved with the officer regarding election for which she was suspended from the service on 23.01.2025 passed by respondent No. 4. Before passing of suspension order i.e 22.01.2025 petitioner made a representation before the concerned authority stating her grievance that condition of the rooms of the Government School, Mata Devalaya, Bhatapara, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) was not appropriate even the officers visited for inspecting the condition of the school for election have not informed petitioner that the election will be conducted in the school but the same was taken as otherwise by the election officers and due to which petitioner was suspended from the service. Subsequently after suspension of petitioner she has submitted a letter dated 24.01.2025 before respondent authority to revoke the suspension order but the same has not been considered till date. The appointing authority of the petitioner is respondent No. 3 but the order of suspension and posting him at another place is passed by respondent No.4 without having any authority to do so, which is violation of rule 9 of M.P/C.G Civil Services (CCA) Rule, 1966. It is submitted that a plain reading of the order of suspension dated 23.01.2025 would go to show that there was no 4 consideration as to why the petitioner had to be placed under suspension. The respondent authority has passed the order with malafied intention and there was no application of mind and the order of suspension was mechanically passed construing as if whenever misbehavior is committed on the part of petitioner, then the authority will have to show cause notice before passing an order of suspension again. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been transferred vide order dated 23.01.2025 by the District Election Officer and the petitioner has been suspended stating that she is misbehaving with the authorities who are engaged in the election duty. He further submits that the Additional District Election Officer is not empowered to pass an order of suspension under Rule 9 (2-A) of the M.P./Chhattisgarh Civil Services (CCA) Rule, 1966, the competent officer would be either DEO or the Director of the Education Department. He placed reliance upon a judgment passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WPS No. 3160/2006 (Anil Kumar Jain Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.) in which the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has specifically has held that the Collector of a District is not empowered under Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification Control & Appeal) Rules, 1966 to place the Class II Officer (Gazzetted) under suspension and to institute departmental enquiry against him. 5 4. On the other hand learned counsel for the State submits that since the power has been delegated by the District Election Officer, as such the person is empowered to pass an order of suspension. He further submits that since the election procedure is going on as such the District Election Officer and the Additional District Election Officer is empowered to pass suspension order against the petitioner. Upon query learned counsel for the State stated that the petitioner is not being given any assignment in the election. 5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and considering the order passed in WPS No. 3160/2006 further considering the fact that the petitioner is not engaged in the following election duty as such, this Court of the opinion that the person who has passed the order is not competent to pass order of suspension. 6. As a fall out and the consequence of the aforesaid discussion, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 23.01.2025 is hereby quashed. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat