1 2026:CGHC:5698 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1228 of 2026 1 - Dr. Shahid Ali S/o Late Hidayat Ali Aged About 60 Years Occupation- Service, Associate Professor, Kushabhau Thakre, Patrakarita Avam Jansanchar Vishwavidyalaya, Kathadih, P.O. Sundar Nagar, Raipur C.G. ... Petitioner Versus 1 - Kushabhau Thakre Patrakarita Avam Jansanchar Vishwavidyalaya Through Its Registrar, Kushabhau Thakre, Patrakarita Avam Jansanchar Vishwavidyalaya, Kathadih, P.O. Sundar Nagar, Raipur C.G. 2 - The Vice-Chancellor Of Kushabhau Thakre, Patrakarita Avam Jansanchar Vishwavidyalaya, Kathadih, P.O. Sundar Nagar, Raipur C.G. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Neeraj Choubey, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Siddharth Pandey, Advocate SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 02 /02/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) against the Respondent No. 2 by directing them to immediately take the steps within a period of 07 days as per Section 13 (7) of the University Act, 2004 for given the effect in the decision taken by the Executive Council of the University in its meeting dated 09.10.2025. 2 10. 2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to pay arrears of salary from 19.08.2015 till date, along with 12% interest per annum for the delay, within a time-bound period of three months. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ’s/order’s/direction’s/relief’s, which this Hon’ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was earlier employed as Associate Professor with the Respondent/University on 19.09.2008. Subsequently, on the basis of some complaint, without proper analyzing the matter, services of the petitioner was terminated vide order dated 13.07.2023. The order of termination was quashed by this Court in WP (S) No. 4897/2023 on the ground that the procedure as provided under the statute has not been followed. He submits that the proposal for taking action against the petitioner has not been put for approval before the Executive Council and therefore, petitioner had submitted representation before the Executive Council. Till date no decision is taken on representation. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondents/University submits that according to his instructions, claim of the petitioner is under consideration and appropriate decision will be taken and orders will be passed in accordance with law, at the earliest. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents placed on record. 5. On due consideration on the submission of counsel for the parties, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of grievance raised, without entering into merits of the claim of petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of directing the Respondent No. 2 to process the claim of the petitioner at the earliest and to take decision on the representation in accordance with 3 law expeditiously, preferably within a period of 01 month from the date of receipt of the order. 6. With the aforesaid observation and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY Date: 2026.02.07 12:29:13 +0530