1 2026:CGHC:8349 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 167 of 2026 1 - Pawan Kumar Sahu S/o Late Hari Lal Sahu Aged About 75 Years R/o Near Hanuman Mandir, Mandal Para Ward No.05, Lafandi, Post- Belatukari Tehsil- Rajim, District- Gariyaband (C.G.) --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Its Secretary Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector Gariyaband Distt- Gariyaband (C.G.) 3 - Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Rajim, Gariyaband, Distt- Gariyaband (C.G.) 4 - Tehsildar Tehsil- Rajim District- Gariyaband (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS system) For Petitioner : Ms. Ruchi Nagar, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Siddharth Mishra, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Date: 2026.02.18 16:58:50 +0530 2 16/02/2026 1. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that pursuant to registration of criminal case against petitioner and filing of charge-sheet, petitioner was initially suspended and subsequently based on the order of conviction passed against him, he was removed from service on 28.02.2002. It is contended that before passing an order of removal, no departmental enquiry was initiated but for the judgment of conviction in criminal case, petitioner was removed. It is further contention of learned counsel for petitioner that subsequently, criminal appeal submitted by petitioner against the judgment of conviction i.e. CR.A. No. 236 of 2002 was allowed vide order dated 13.08.2024, in which, petitioner has been acquitted from the charges. Petitioner thereafter submitted a representation before the Collector, District – Gariyaband for reinstating petitioner in service and to pass appropriate orders for extending consequential benefits and retiral dues in favour of petitioner, however, it is still pending consideration, therefore, direction be issued to respondent No.2/Collector to take decision on the representation submitted by petitioner at the earliest. 2. Learned State counsel submits that as petitioner is not pressing this petition on merits and only seeking a direction to respondent No.2 to take decision on the pending representation, he is having no objection to the limited prayer made. 3. On due consideration on the submission of learned counsel for respective parties without observing anything on merits of the case of petitioner, this petition is disposed of directing respondent No.2 to take decision on the representation dated 24.09.2024 in accordance with 3 law expeditiously preferably within further period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. Petitioner will be at liberty to submit fresh representation before respondent No.2 and if such representation is submitted, concerned authority shall consider and decide the same along with pending representation as observed above. 4. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram