1 / 2 2026:CGHC:14195 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2430 of 2026 • Shri Virendra Kumar Watti S/o Shri Dhruva Ram Watti Aged About 45 Years R/o - 59 Diwan Para, Post - Kanker, Gadpichhawadi, Gad Pichhawadi, District - North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Director Director, Public Instruction Directorate Of Public Instruction, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3. District Education Officer District - North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh. 4. Joint Director ( Education) Bastar Division, Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Faisal Akhtar, Advocate For Respondents-State : Ms. Sakshi Bajpai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 25/03/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs. “10.1 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order of suspension passed against the petitioner (P/1). 10.2 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner forthwith in service. 10.3 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to conclude the departmental enquiry within a time-bound period. 10.4 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct that the period of suspension be treated as duty for all consequential service benefits. 10.5 Grant any other writ(s), order(s), relief(s) in favour of the petitioner, which the Hon’ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 2 circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner while working on the post of Assistant Grade-II has been suspended. He also contended that after suspension departmental enquiry was directed, however, it is also not concluded till date. It is contention of learned counsel for petitioner that apart from issuance of charge- memo there is no further proceeding in the enquiry stated to be initiated against petitioner. He also pointed out that for the same incident, District Education Officer was also suspended, however, his suspension was revoked within short period. Petitioner has submitted representation before Respondent No. 1 on 13.12.2024 and 17.06.2025, however, representations submitted by petitioner have not been considered and decided. 3. Learned counsel for State submits that she may be granted some time to file reply to the writ petition. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Grievance of petitioner is that petitioner has been suspended on 13.04.2023 and further after issuance of charge-memo there is no further proceeding in the departmental enquiry proceeding. The representation submitted by petitioner for revocation of suspension with other prayer, before Respondent No. 1, is still pending consideration. 6. In the aforementioned facts of the case, submission of learned counsel for the respective parties, instead of keeping this writ petition pending seeking reply from the respondents, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition directing Respondent No. 1 to consider and take decision on the representation submitted by petitioner, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a further period of 06 weeks from the date of receipt of the order passed by this Court. 7. Accordingly, with the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn JUDGE