1 2026:CGHC:20478 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5226 of 2022  Smt. Jayanti Adwar W/o Late Bhupendra Nath Adwar Aged About 63 Years R/o Ward No. 07 Dhouratikra, Baikunthpur, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Chhattisgarh 2. Director Directorate Of Chhattisgarh State Audit, Block-I 2nd Floor, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. Deputy Director Chhattisgarh State Audit, Regional Office, Near Chaupati, Chopda Para, Ambikapur,, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 4. Municipal Council Baikunthpur, Through The Chief Municipal Officer, Baikunthpur, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Aniket Verma, Advocate For State : Mr. Anway Tiwari, P.L. For Respondent No. 4 : Mr. Bhupendra Singh, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 2 1.5.2026 1) By way of this petition, petitioner has sought following reliefs:- (i) To direct the respondent authorities to call for the record of the case. (ii) To kindly set aside the letter dated 15.3.2019 and declare the same null and void. (iii) To kindly direct the respondents to initiate the process to quantify and release entire amount towards leave encashment with interest rate which this Hon’ble Court deems fit. (iv) To kindly make any other order that may be deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including awarding of the costs to the petitioner. 2) Facts of present case are that initially petitioner was appointed as an Ad-hoc employee under work-charge establishment of Special Area Development Authority, Chirmiri vide order dated 1.12.1992. Her services were attached vide order dated 18.5.1999 with the O/o Chief Municipal Officer,Chirmiri and she was posted as AG-III. Subsequently, she was promoted to the post of AG-II vide order dated 11.4.2008 and thereafter she was promoted to the post of AG-I vide order dated 14.9.2018. A show-cause notice was served to the petitioner and one Mohd. Ishaq Khan by the Municipal Council Baikunthpur on 15.3.2019 on the basis of an audit objection and they were directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 3,79,374/-. 3) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the figure arrived at by the respondent No. 4 is erroneous and arbitrary as no 3 opportunity of hearing was afforded and no inquiry was conducted. He further submits that the relevant documents are lying with the department itself and without verifying those documents, a decision has been taken behind the back of the petitioner vide notice dated 15.3.2019. He contends that notice dated 15.3.2019 may be quashed. 4) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 4 submits that pursuant to an audit objection, show-cause notice dated 15.3.2019 was issued against the petitioner and one Mohd. Ishaq Khan. He further submits that original documents are in possession of Mohd. Ishaq Khan therefore matter could not be inquired properly. He contends that pursuant to an undertaking given by petitioner, the alleged embezzled amount has been withheld from retiral dues whereas remaining retiral dues of petitioner have been settled. He further contends that this petition is misconceived and deserves to be dismissed. 5) Learned State counsel submits that there is dispute between the petitioner and respondent No. 4. 6) Perusal of notice dated 15.3.2019 would reveal that petitioner has been directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 3,79,374/- with the respondent No. 4 on the basis of an audit objection. It is apparent that no show-cause notice was issued ; no inquiry was conducted and no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner prior to passing of impugned notice contemplating recovery. 4 7) Therefore, in my opinion, respondent No. 4 was under obligation to afford proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before passing any adverse order. Accordingly, the notice dated 15.3.2019 (Annexure P/1) is hereby quashed and writ petition stands allowed. 8) However, respondent No. 4 would be at liberty to take appropriate action against the petitioner strictly in accordance with law after affording due opportunity of hearing to her. It is expected that the entire exercise shall be concluded within period of 150 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a