1 2026:CGHC:26503 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4889 of 2026 Dayal Singh S/o Late J.P. Singh Aged About 48 Years Occupation- Govt Service R/o Beside Little Flower School Mangaon Road Kawardha District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Education Department Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Directorate Of Public Education Chhattisgarh Indravati Bhawan Block- -3 First Floor New Raipur Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Commissioner Durg Division Udyog Bhawan Malviya Nagar, Chowk Durg District- Durg (C.G.) 4. The District Education Officer District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Neeraj Choubey, Advocate For Respondent/ State : Ms. Diksha Gouraha, Dy. G.A. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 30/06/2026 1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs :- “10.1 That, the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ (s), direction(s), order(s) and direct the respondent authority to revoke the JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2026.06.30 16:55:54 +0530 2 suspension of the petitioner immediately and release the full salary in the above period. 10.2 That, the Hon'ble High Court declared that, initiation, continuation of the departmental enquiry against the petitioner by the respondent No.3 is bad in law and pass the order accordingly. 10.3 That, the Hon'ble High Court may kindly be pleased to direct respondent No2. for releasing the salary of the petitioner during the period of 15.06.2023 to 21.09.2023 along with interest for delay payment @ 12 Ρ.Α.. 10.4 That, the Hon'ble High Court may kindly be please to direct the respondent state for taking the action against the responsible persons those are created the false case against the petitioner and harassed the petitioner. 10.5 That, the Hon'ble High Court may kindly be pleased to impose the heavy cost of Rupees 50 lacks upon the respondent no. 3-4 who has continuously harassed the petitioner without authority. Further, the Hon'ble Court may be awarded the cost of the petitioner and also pleased to issue any other directions/orders, which this Hon'ble Court may think 3 fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case..” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, while serving as Block Education Officer, was placed under suspension vide order dated 13.12.2024. Thereafter, respondent No.3 issued a charge sheet dated 24.01.2025 alleging certain irregularities and called upon the petitioner to submit his reply. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner submitted a detailed reply to the charge sheet; however, despite lapse of considerable time, neither has any departmental enquiry been initiated nor has the suspension order been revoked. He further submits that the petitioner has already submitted a representation for redressal of his grievances, but the same is still pending consideration before the competent authority. He, therefore, prays that a direction be issued to the concerned authority to consider and decide the said representation within a stipulated period. 3. Learned State counsel submits that if the petitioner submits a fresh representation seeking revocation of the suspension and for redressal of his grievances, the same shall be examined and decided by the competent authority in accordance with law, keeping in view the applicable circulars/ instructions of the State Government as well as the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, within a reasonable period. 4 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation for revocation of the suspension and for redressal of the grievances within a period of 15 days from today, the competent respondent/ authority is directed to consider and decide the petitioner's fresh representation in accordance with law, on its own merits, expeditiously, preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the representation along with copy of this order. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner and the competent authority shall take an independent decision strictly in accordance with law. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE Jyoti