1 2026:CGHC:25880 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8083 of 2022 * - Shantanu Karmakar S/o Late S. K. Karmakar Aged About 56 Years R/o G- 2, Mandi Road, Infornt Of ICICI Bank, District Jagdalpur/ Baster Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Commissioner Higher Education, Block C-3, II And III Floor, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - The District Collector District Bastar Chhattisgarh 4 - The Principal Government P. G. College, Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh 5 - The High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee Through Its Secretary, Office Of The Commissioner, Tribal And Scheduled Caste Development, Block 4D, Ground Floor, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Avinash K. Mishra, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 24/06/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.07.01 12:30:53 +0530 2 “10.I That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) against the respondent’s authority and may kindly be pleased to quash, set -aside the impugned order dated 23/ 16.06.2022 (ANNEXURE- P/1), issued by the respondent no. 5. 10.II The Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ(s)/ direction(s)/ order(s) by quashing and setting aside the termination order of the petitioner dated 23.05.2001 (ANNEXURE-P/6), issued by the respondent authority. 10.III The Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to join his services back in the respondent College and further direct the respondent authority to pay all the consequential service benefits to the petitioner along with the interest. 10.IV The Hon’ble Court kindly inflict the exemplary cost upon the respondent’s authority for torturing, causing mental torment, and exploiting the petitioner and violating fundamental and human rights of the petitioner. 10.V Any other relief(s), which this Hon’ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Mr. Avinash K. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would confine this petition against the order Annexure P/6 dated 23.05.2001, whereby order of termination from services of the petitioner was issued by office of respondent No. 2. He would submit that the petitioner was appointed temporarily on the post of Adhoc Lab Assistant under the respondent No. 4 on 20.12.1984. He would further submit that a policy decision was taken by the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh to regularize the services of all temporary employees appointed prior to 31.12.1988 and in this regard a circular was issued on 09.01.1990. 3. Mr. Mishra would contend that the petitioner filled up a form wherein he mentioned his caste ‘Kamar’ which is a notified scheduled tribe. The services of the petitioner were regularized vide order dated 28.05.1990 3 pursuant to circular dated 09.01.1990. He would submit that the service record of the petitioner was scrutinized by office of Sub- Divisional Officer (Revenue), Jagdalpur. Thereafter article of charge was issued wherein it was alleged that the petitioner secured employment on the basis of fake caste certificate. The services of the petitioner were terminated by the Additional Director, Higher Education, Raipur, Division Bastar, Raipur vide order dated 23.05.2001. Subsequently, the Principal of School, on recommendation of the Collector lodged a written report at Police Station City Kotwali, Jagdalpur and a Crime No. 556/2000 was registered for commission of offence punishable under Sections 419 and 420 of IPC. The police after investigation filed charge-sheet and the learned trial Court vide order dated 14.11.2005 discharged the petitioner from alleged offences. However, liberty was granted to the respondent authorities to refer the case for verification of social status of the petitioner. 4. Mr. Mishra would further contend that against order dated 23.05.2001, WP No. 1485/2001 was filed, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 30.06.2009 with liberty to approach the Caste Scrutiny Committee. It is contended that the petitioner approached the Caste Scrutiny Committee and after due scrutiny, the said Committee invalidated the social status certificate of the petitioner. Mr. Mishra would argue that initially the petitioner was appointed on Adhoc basis and pursuant to police decision, his services were regularized by the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh vide order dated 28.05.1990. He would contend that the services of the petitioner were regularized without considering his social status and the said post was not reserved for member of 4 reserved category. It is contended that the findings recorded by the authorities in the order dated 23.05.2001 are perverse and baseless. 5. Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondents would oppose. He would submit that the petitioner secured regularization of his services on the basis of his social status as he belongs to ‘Kamar’ caste which comes within scheduled tribe community. He would submit that during scrutiny of service record, this facts reflect and thereafter an FIR was registered and departmental inquiry was also initiated. He would submit that in the departmental inquiry, the petitioner could not establish the fact that he did not secure employment on the basis of his social status and therefore rightly order of dismissal from service was passed against him. He would submit that this writ petition deserves to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused documents. 7. Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed as an Adhoc Lab Assistant under the respondent No. 4 pursuant to order dated 20.12.1984. A policy decision was taken by the State Government to regularize the services of all daily wagers, adhoc employees appointed prior to 31.12.1988 and in this regard circular was issued on 09.01.1990. It is not case of respondents that services of the petitioner were regularized against the post reserved for member of scheduled tribe community, rather it is a case where decision was taken by the State Government to regularize services of all adhoc and daily rated employees irrespective of their caste, place of residence etc., therefore, the allegation made against the petitioner has no foundation. In the departmental inquiry, penalty of dismissal from service was passed way back on 23.03.2001 and said order was challenged by filing WP 5 No. 1485/200. Pursuant to order passed in said writ petition, the petitioner approached the Caste Scrutiny Committee and social status certificate of the petitioner, issued by the Naib Tehsildar, Jagdalpur on 21.09.1989 has been invalidated. As it is a case where employment was not secured on the basis social status certificate, therefore, allegations levelled against the petitioner and findings recorded by the disciplinary authority are perverse. 8. Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts, the order Annexure P/6 dated 23.05.2001 is hereby quashed. If the petitioner has not attained age of superannuation, he shall be reinstated forthwith with all consequential benefits including arrears of salary. 9. Consequently, the petition is allowed. No costs. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti