1 2025:CGHC:16796 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 851 of 2020 1 - Bharatlal Meshram S/o Shri Puranlal Meshram Aged About 52 Years Presently Working As Teacher (Panchayat), Government Middle School, Haradula, Block- Charama, District- North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Joint Director Directorate Of Panchayat, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, North Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. D. N. Prajapati, Adv. For Respondent : Ms. Mukta Tripathi, Panel Lawyer. (Hon’ble Mr. Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J) Order on Board 09/04/2025 1. Heard. Digitally signed by AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Date: 2025.04.11 18:14:03 +0530 2 2. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :- “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, thereby directing the respondent authorities to release full salary for intervening period from the date of suspension to date of reinstatement in service i.e. from 30.11.2016 to 07.11.2019, forthwith, including increments, in accordance with law. 10.2 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given. 10.3 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the order dated 07.11.2019 so far it relates to condition no.1 and further be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to release all the monetary benefit including salary and arrears from 30.11.2016 to 07.11.2019.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner was posted on the post of Teacher (Panchayat). Because of a criminal case bearing Special Criminal Case (POCSO Act) No. 5/2017 registered in the Court of Upper Sessions Judge (FTC) and Special Judge (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012), North Bastar, Kanker against him, he was placed under suspension vide order (Annexure P-2) dated 30-11-2016. Subsequently vide order (Annexure P-4) dated 6-11-2017, he was compulsorily retired on account of holding him guilty in the departmental enquiry proceeding, but the petitioner was acquitted by the Special Judge in above criminal 3 case vide judgment (Annexure P-5) dated 26-2-2018. Thereafter, on representation filed by the petitioner, he was reinstated in his employment vide order (Annexure P-8) dated 7-11-2019, but monetary benefit for the suspension period till his reinstatement in service i.e. 30- 11-2016 to 6-11-2019 was declined to be granted to the petitioner, therefore, he has filed instant petition. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner filed representation (Annexure P-9) dated 14-11- 2019 for granting him monetary benefit for above period, but the same has not been decided yet. He further submits that, this petition may be disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file fresh representation for redressal of his grievance and concerned authority may be directed to decide the same within the period specified by this court. 4. Learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State has no objection to allow the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. On due consideration of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner is allowed. This petition is disposed of at this stage, granting liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondents/competent authority for redressal of his grievance as raised in this petition, within a period of 30 days from today along with a copy of this order. In the event of filing such representation by the petitioner, the respondents/competent authority is directed to decide the same within a further period of 90 days from the date of receipt of fresh representation of the petitioner. 4 6. In view of above observations and directions, this petition is disposed of. 7. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. No cost(s). Sd/- Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi JUDGE Pathak