2026:CGHC:18166 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPL No. 91 of 2022 1 - Dcb Bank Limited A Body Corporate Having Its Registered Office At 6th Floor, Tower A, Peninsula Business Park, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai - 400013, Maharastra And Interalia A Branch Office Amongst Other At Gani Plaza, Main Road, Devendra Nagar,raipur Gani Plaza, Main Road, Devendra Nagar, P.S. - Devendra Nagar, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh - 492001 (Through - Suraj Ghosh, Authorised Signatory) 2 - Branch Manager Dcb Bank Limited, Main Road, Near Bus Stand, Balodabazar, Chhattisgarh, P.S. Balodabazar, District : Balodabazar- Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Raipur R/o Office Of The Labour Commissioner, Avanti Vihar, Raipur Chhattisgarh 492001 2 - Pooja Sharma D/o Lt. Shri Shyamnarayan Sharma Aged About 27 Years R/o Near Mishra Diary, Sanjay Colony, Balodabazar, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners : None appears even in two rounds. For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Abhishek Banjare, CGC For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Vinay Nagdeo, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 21.04.2026 1. The petitioners have filed this petition seeking following relief(s) : “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate directions in context of the impugned actions of the Respondents which were unreasonably and arbitrarily made by Respondent No.1 and set aside the entire proceedings initiated under section 2A of the Act inclusive of the certificate issued. 10.2 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash/set-aside the proceedings initiated before -2- the central Government Industrial Tribunal, and Labour Court, Jabalpur based on the certificate issued by the Respondent No. 1. 10.3 Cost of the petition may also be granted to the Petitioner. 10.4 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the Petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 2. Mr. Nagdeo, Advocate appearing for respondent No.2 would submit that respondent No.2 challenged the order of termination dated 17.02.2021 before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Raipur (C.G.). He would further submit that conciliation proceeding was initiated by respondent No.1 and the matter was referred to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court Jabalpur (MP) vide order dated 08.11.2021. He would contend that against the said order, this petition has been preferred. 3. Mr. Nagdeo, Advocate appearing for respondent No.2 would submit that respondent No.2 has already been appointed somewhere else and he does not want to continue any proceeding before the learned Labour Court. 4. Heard. 5. Taking into consideration the submissions advanced by Mr. Nagdeo and the order impugned challenged by the Bank/Employer, in my opinion, no case is made out for interference. Accordingly, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha