1 2026:CGHC:5804 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8834 of 2023 1 - Rajesh Kumar Meshram, S/o Late Shri Madan Lal Meshram Aged About 48 Years Lecturer Lb, Higher Secondary School, Godalwahi, Block And Tahsil Chhuriya, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director Directorate Of Chhattisgarh Public Instruction, Indravati Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - District Education Officer Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.). 4 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.). 5 - Principal Govt. Higher Secondary School, Godalwahi, Block And Tahsil Chhuriya, District Rajnandgaon(C.G). ... Respondent(s) RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Hari Om Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 02/02/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash impugned order dated 07.02.2022 Annexure P-1 and order of punishment imposing withholding of one increment with non cumulative effect and for future of remaining pay to suspension period may be held as illegal, and respondents may kindly be ordered to pay the remaining pay and annual increment of suspension period and to give all consequential benefit, in the interest of justice. Or That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to expeditious decide pending appeal dated 07.08.2023 (Annexure P-3), in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, any other relief which the Hon'ble Court deems fit and litigation expenses may kindly be also be allowed.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the impugned order dated 07.02.2022 passed by the Director, Public Instruction, Raipur, withholding one increment without cumulative effect and forfeiting the remaining pay of the suspension period, has been passed in a 3 perverse and arbitrary manner, which is apparent from the said order issued by Respondent No. 2. Further, the suspension order dated 12.07.2019 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, District Panchayat, Rajnandgaon, was issued without conducting any departmental enquiry, and no enquiry was ever held. The petitioner also filed an appeal before Respondent No. 1. It is further submitted that in WPS No. 984/2018, decided on 20.04.2018, the High Court of Chhattisgarh set aside a similar punishment passed without enquiry and directed departmental action against the concerned officer for violating Rule 14 of the C.G. Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966, as mentioned in paragraph 4 of the said order, however, the same has been flagrantly violated by Respondent No. 2, and therefore, Respondent No. 1 deserves to be directed to take appropriate action. Moreover, vide letter dated 21.12.2020, the Chief Executive Officer, Respondent No. 4, informed the District Education Officer, Respondent No. 3, that if charges were not served within 45 days, the suspension would automatically come to an end, but the Director failed to consider the same and illegally ordered forfeiture of the remaining suspension period pay, and thus, the respondents deserve to be directed to pay the remaining suspension period salary, annual increments, and arrears to the petitioner within one month from the order of the High Court. Lastly, the District Education Officer, Rajnandgaon, forwarded the charge sheet, letter dated 23.02.2021 of the C.G. Secondary 4 Education Board, Raipur, and details of charges to the Director, Public Instruction, Respondent No. 2; however, the same are illegal and without authority of law, as the DEO, Respondent No. 3, is not the punishing authority, and since the punishment has been imposed by Respondent No. 2, the said charge sheet and related documents have no legal validity. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 07.02.2022, whereby the reply submitted by the petitioner was held to be unjustifiable and, consequently, while reinstating him from suspension, a penalty of withholding one annual increment with non-cumulative effect was imposed, and the period of suspension was treated only for the purpose of subsistence allowance. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has approached this Court, contending that he has already preferred an appeal against the impugned order, which is presently pending consideration before the competent authority, and therefore, a prayer has been made seeking a direction to the concerned authorities to expeditiously consider and decide the said appeal in accordance with law. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that the present petition, as framed and filed, is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed at the threshold, as the petitioner has approached this Court without awaiting the outcome of the statutory appeal against the impugned order (Annexure P/1). It is further submitted that while working as Lecturer (Panchayat) at 5 Government Higher Secondary School, Godalwahi, Block Chhuria, the petitioner was suspended vide order dated 12.07.2019 by the CEO, Zila Panchayat, Rajnandgaon, on account of negligence and irregularities in evaluation of answer sheets of the High School Examination, 2017. Pursuant to the policy decision of the State Government, the petitioner’s services were absorbed into the School Education Department, thereby making him a State Government employee. He further submits that under Rule 10 of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966, minor penalties, including withholding of increments, may be imposed in accordance with the procedure prescribed under Rule 16. In the present case, before passing the impugned order, the petitioner was duly informed, granted personal hearing vide letter dated 31.08.2021, and afforded reasonable opportunity to submit his explanation, wherein he admitted his guilt. After considering the same, the competent authority passed the impugned order imposing the minor penalty of withholding of one increment without cumulative effect, strictly in accordance with law, without any procedural irregularity. It is, therefore, submitted that the impugned order is just, proper, and legal, does not suffer from any infirmity, and no departmental inquiry was required under the Rules. The petition is thus devoid of merit and substance, and the petitioner is not entitled to any relief or interest. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be dismissed. 6 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and further taking into account that a period of two years has already elapsed, during which it appears that the appeal may have been decided, though the petitioner has no knowledge thereof, this Court deems it appropriate, at this stage, not to keep the matter pending and accordingly disposes of the petition with a direction to the concerned respondent authorities to decide the petitioner’s appeal dated 07.08.2023 (Annexure P/3), if the same has not already been decided; and in the event that the appeal has already been decided and any adverse order has been passed against the petitioner, the petitioner shall be at liberty to file a fresh petition in accordance with law. 7. With this observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat