1 / 5 2026:CGHC:13742 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4084 of 2025 • Dr. Bhagwati Prasad Tiwari S/o Madhav Prasad Tiwari Aged About 62 Years R/o Ward No. 17, Indira Gandhi Ward, Kedarpur, Ambikapur, District Surguja C.G. --- Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2. Sarguja University, Through Registrar, Sarguja University, Ambikapur, District Sarguja C.G. 3. Director, Directorate Of Higher Education, Regional Office, Ambikapur, Sarguja (C.G.) 4. Manager, Saraswati Shishu Mandir Samiti Subhash Nagar, Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) 5. President, Saraswati Shishu Mandir Samiti Subhash Nagar, Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) 6. Manager, Saraswati Shishu Mandir Higher Secondary School, Devi Ganj Road, Subhash Nagar, Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Advocate For Respondent-State For Respondent No. 2 For Respondent No. 4 to 6 : : : Ms. Anuja Sharma, Dy. Govt. Advocate Mr. Neeraj Choubey, Advocate Mr. Divyanand Patel, Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 23/03/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs. “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside/ quash the impugned 2 / 5 order dated 08.05.2025 (Annexure P-1) and direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to work as Principal at Saraswati College, Ambikapur, District Surguja, C.G. 10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deem fit and appropriate.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner was appointed as Principal of Saraswati College, Subhash Nagar, Ambikapur District Surguja, C.G. vide order dated 01.06.2007. Petitioner thereafter was issued order of appointment again on 08.10.2016 pursuant to the letter dated 08.10.2016 issued by the Respondent No. 2-University. She submits that petitioner was removed from services levelling certain allegation vide Anneure P-1 dated 08.05.2025 issued by Manager of Sarawati Shishu Mandir Samiti (for short “Samiti”), which is in contravention of the approval given by the Respondent No. 2- University and Clause 31(3) of the College Code formulated under the Statute No. 28 of the Chhattisgarh University Act, 1973. She contended that according to the College Code, first, decision has to be taken by the governing body of the Samiti and if the governing body takes decision of removing of employee like petitioner then it is to be placed before the Executive Council for approval, however, none of the procedure has been followed and therefore impugned order Annexure P-1 be quashed. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents No. 4 to 6 would oppose the submission of learned counsel for petitioner. However, upon putting query with regard to legal submission made by learned counsel for petitioner about following of procedure for removal of employee like petitioner of the Saraswati Shishu Mandir Samiti, he would submit that 3 / 5 according to his instruction, proposal for termination of service of petitioner has not been placed before the governing body nor the decision of the governing body has been further forwarded to the Executive Council of the University for approval. He however submits that petitioner has been found indulged in committing irregularities. 4. Learned counsel for Respondent No. 2 would submit that service of petitioner and Respondents No. 4 to 6/ College, is governed with the College Code formulated under the Statute No. 28 of the Chhattisgarh Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1973. He submits that in reply, Respondent No. 4 to 6 have not taken specific stand that the procedure as directed in the College Code, in particular, Clause 31(3) has been followed. Compliance of provisions under Clause 31(3) is mandatory if any of the employee of the college is said to be dismissed from service or to remove from service. In absence of any specific explanation in this regard, it appears that order Annexure P-1 has been passed in contravention of provision of College Code. 5. Learned State counsel submits that grievance of petitioner is against Respondents No. 4 to 6. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents placed on record. 7. This writ petition is filed challenging the order Annexure P-1 dated 08.05.2025 passed by Respondent No. 4 in the capacity of Manager, In the impugned order, it does not mention that the proposal for removal/ dismissal of petitioner from service is placed before governing body. It also does not mention that prior to passing of order Annexure P-1, 4 / 5 matter was placed before the Executive Council of the Respondent No. 2-University. 8. In reply submitted by Respondents No. 4 to 6, there is no specific pleading about following due procedure as provided under Clause 31 of the College Code. In fact, learned counsel for Respondent No. 2 and 4 to 6, during course of arguments, have admitted that College Code applies to Respondents No. 4 to 6 as also to petitioner. Clause 31(3) of the College Code is extracted below for ready reference: “31. (1) x x x x (2) x x x x (3) No order imposing any of the penalties specified in sub-paragraph (1) above than fine shall be made except in accordance with the procedure for imposing penalties on Government servant prescribed by the Chhattisgarh Government and in force at the time the appointing authority orders an inquiry against the College employee concerned. Provided that no proposal to reduce in rank or pay a teacher confirmed in the Service of the College or to remove or dismiss him from Service or to retire him compulsorily shall be deemed to have been passed by the Governing Body unless it is supported by a majority of two-thirds of the members present at the meeting of the Governing Body in which it comes up for consideration and where a decision is duly taken it shall not be given effect to unless it is approved by the Executive Council.” 9. In the aforementioned facts of the case, where the proposal for removal of petitioner from services has not been placed before the governing body and passed by the majority of 2/3rd of the members present and further that there is no approval of the decision of the governing body, by the Executive Council, in the opinion of this Court, the order Annexure P-1 is passed in contravention of the provisions under the 5 / 5 College Code, therefore, it is not sustainable and accordingly, it is quashed. 10. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed. Petitioner will be entitled for all the consequential benefits flowing from this order. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge pwn PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA