1 2026:CGHC:21895 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4266 of 2022 1 - Purnanand Naik S/o Shri Tilak Ram Nayak, Aged About 40 Years Posted At Attendant Grade 2 (Line), Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company, Distribution Center, Saraipali (Rural), District Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh) R/o Madhopali, Post Saraipali, Tahsil And P.S. Saraipali, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Power And Energy Department, New Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Chief Engineer (Regional), Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Superintendent Engineer (Distribution), Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company, Mahasamund, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Executive Engineer (O And M), Divisional, Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company, Check Post, Sarangarh Road, Saraipali (Rural), District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 5 - The Assistant Engineer, Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company, Check Post, Sarangarh Road, Saraipali (Rural), District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 6 - The Junior Engineer, Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company, Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Center, Check Post, Sarangarh Road, Saraipali (Rural), District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. R.S. Patel, Advocate For State : Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, Panel Lawyer For respondents No.2 to 6 : Mr. Mayank Chandrakar, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 11.05.2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 Issue a writ and direct the respondent no. 4 to -2- either provide copies of electronic documents mentioned in list of evidence enclosed along with charge-sheet dated 07.04.2022 issued against the petitioner or else take a stand that they would not be relying on such electronic documents. 10.2 Issue a writ and direct the respondent no. 4 to grant further 4 weeks-time from the date supplying copies of electronic documents or taking a stand of not relying on those electronic documents, as the case may be, in order to enable the petitioner prepare his defense adequately and file his reply to the charge-sheet. 10.3 Pass an appropriate order or issue writ as deemed fit under the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Attendant Grade-II (Line) in the office of respondent No.6 vide order dated 07.05.2011. He would further submit that the petitioner was placed under suspension by respondent No.4 vide order dated 15.11.2021 and thereafter, article of charge was issued on 24.12.2021 making certain allegations including involvement in the Anti-Social Activities. Mr. Patel would contend that the petitioner moved an application before the Executive Engineer of the Department to provide relevant documents depicted in article of charge on 30.05.2022. He would further contend that again an application was moved by the petitioner on 14.06.2022. He would argue that when respondent authorities failed to provide the required documents, the petitioner filed a writ petition and the interim order was passed in his favour on 24.06.2022. He would further argue that the respondent authorities including the Disciplinary Authority and Inquiry Officer cannot initiate a departmental inquiry de hors the statutory Rules. It is argued that the Inquiry Officers/Disciplinary Authority are under an obligation to 3 provide relevant documents mentioned in the article of charge. He would pray to allow this petition. 3. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State would oppose the submissions made by Mr. Patel. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5. Taking into consideration the limited grievance raised by the petitioner, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4 to provide the relevant documents as requested by the petitioner in his application expeditiously preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. After supply of those documents, the Disciplinary Authority would be at liberty to initiate a departmental inquiry against the petitioner, if so advised. 6. With the aforesaid observation(s)/direction(s), the present petition is disposed of. 7. Interim order granted earlier is hereby vacated. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha