1 2026:CGHC:24435 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6039 of 2022 Dr. M.B.P. Vishwakarma, S/o Shri Bhaiyalal Vishwakarma, Aged About 62 Years, Occupation Service, Presently Posted As Veterinary Assistant Surgeon, R/o F -1, Meregao Office Colony, Ambagarh Chowki, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry Development Mahandi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Director Directorate of Veterinary Services, Indrawati Bhawan , Block No. 3, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Deputy Director Veterinary Services Rajnandgaon, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Vikash Meshram Veterinary Assistant Surgeon, Ambagarh Chowki,, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. B. P. Singh, Advocate For State : Mr. Vinay Pandey, Deputy Advocate General Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 17/06/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE 2 “10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be please to issue an appropriate writ (s)/ order (s) /direction (s) against the respondent's authority by directing the respondent state to take the cognizance upon the corrupt practices and the financial irregularities of the private respondent and taking the action against them in according with law. 10.2. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent for taking the necessary steps upon the representations of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law and initiate the departmental enquiry against the private respondent, within the stipulated time period of one month. 10.3. That, the Hon'ble High Court may kindly be pleases to direct the respondent authority to protect the life & services of the petitioner against the threating of the private respondent. 10.4. Any other relief/relief's, which this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of the petition, may also please be granted to the petitioner.” 2. Mr. B.P. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that respondent No. 4 committed financial irregularities and, therefore, complaints were made before the higher authorities against him, but no action has been taken. 3. Mr. Vinay Pandey, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State would submit that a show-cause notice was issued to respondent No. 4 and he has refunded the embezzled amount. 4. Mr. Singh, at this stage, would submit that the Department ought to have initiated a departmental inquiry against respondent No. 4. 3 5. Heard. 6. Taking into consideration the issue involved in the present case and the submissions advanced by the respective counsel for the parties, the petitioner is permitted to make a detailed representation before respondent No. 1, and in turn, the respondent No. 1 is directed to consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law. 7. With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), the petition is hereby disposed of. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim