1 / 3 2026:CGHC:6409 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1164 of 2026 Avinash Kumar Sharma S/o Shri S.K. Sharma Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Khokhsa, Distt Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh Presently Posted As Male Supervisor (Physically, Handicapped Category) At Sector Jaijaipur, Block Jaijaipur, Distt. - Sakti Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary Health Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Tahsil And Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Divisional Joint Director Health Services, Bilaspur Division, Distt - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 3 - Chief Medical And Health Officer Sakti, Distt. Sakti Chhattisgarh 4 - Block Medical Officer Community Health Centre, Distt - Sakti Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate For State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Govt. Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 05.02.2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.02.07 15:33:12 +0530 2 / 3 “10.1 It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus quashing the impugned order dated 14.01.2026 passed by the respondent no. 2 and order dated 16.01.2026 passed by respondent no. 3. 10.2 It is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue any writ or direction or order as deem fit in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner while working on the post of Rural Health Coordinator/Multipurpose Health Worker who was promoted on the post of Male Supervisor vide order dated 30.12.2025. Petitioner thereafter served with a notice observing that the promotion of petitioner was erroneous and have sought reply. Petitioner accordingly, submitted reply explaining all the facts within specified time frame. On the same day, order was passed canceling promotion of petitioner. He submits that while canceling the order of promotion of petitioner, no reasons has been assigned and therefore, order of canceling promotion of petitioner is not a speaking order and not in accordance with law, hence, it is not sustainable in the eyes of law. 3. Learned counsel for State submits that she has sought instructions and according to her instructions petitioner’s seniority has been wrongly considered, much above than the actual seniority, therefore, promotion of petitioner was erroneously done. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, and perused the documents enclosed along with this writ petition. 5. The grievance of the petitioner is against the order Annexure P-1 whereby, order of promotion of petitioner was canceled. It is well settled law that when any adverse order has to be passed against any 3 / 3 employee, the said employee has to be served with a notice and after considering the reply submitted by that employee, reasoned speaking order has to be passed. 6. From perusal of record it is appearing that though petitioner was served with a show cause notice asking him to submit reply however, authority while passing the order Annexure P-1 which is an adverse order to the petitioner. It does not bear any reason or cause to arrive at conclusion that promotion of petitioner is errouneous. Least it is expected from the higher officials of the department that if any adverse order has to be passed it should be reasoned and speaking order following principles of natural justice which is lacking in this order . In view of above, order Annexure P-1 is not sustainable in the eyes of law, accordingly it is quashed, however, respondent authorities will be at liberty to pass fresh reasoned and speaking order if they so desires. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed with the aforesaid liberty. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Alfiza