1 2026:CGHC:12116 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 9613 of 2023 1 - Ku. Anita Nande D/o Late Shri Shyamlal Nande Aged About 50 Years R/o Tulsipur, Ward No. 18, Behind Sai Mandir, Rajnandgaon, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Co-Operative Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - General Administration Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Registrar Co-Operative Societies, Chhattisgarh Block-3, Second And Third Floor, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee, Tribal And Schedule Caste Development Office Of Commissioner, Schedule Tribe And Schedule Caste Development, Block- 4d, Ground Floor, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 5 - Addl. Registrar Co-Operative Socities, Chhattisgarh Block-3, Second And Third Floor, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :- Mrs. Surya Kawalkar Dangi, Advocate For State :- Mr. D.R. Minj, Dy. A.G. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB-Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 13.03.2026 1. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the terminationorder dated 06.10.2023 (Annexure P/1), being as illegal and bad in law. 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to comply with the directions issued in WPS no. 203/2016 (Annexure P/3) in its true letter and spirit. 10.3 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the to respondent authorities to permit the petitioner discharge his services as a general category employee, without raising any further dispute with regard to his caste. 3 10.4 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems, fit in the facts and circumstances may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.” 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the parties submit that the issue involved in the present writ petition stands squarely covered by the judgment rendered by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WPS No. 8211 of 2023 (Kishore Kumar Ninawe vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others) decided on 28.02.2026. It is jointly prayed that the present writ petition may also be disposed of in terms of the observations and findings recorded therein. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment are reproduced below:– “14. From the above legal position and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra v. Milind, along with the memorandum issued by the Government of India and the State circular dated 01.10.2011, it is clear that employees appointed prior to 28.11.2000 on the basis of Halba/Halba Koshti caste certificates are entitled to protection of their services. This protection is based on binding judicial directions and cannot be taken away by later administrative action. Therefore, even though the Caste Scrutiny Committee later held that the petitioner belongs to Halba Koshti and invalidated the caste certificate, such a finding cannot affect the petitioner’s service. At most, it can affect future benefits under the reserved 4 category, but it cannot cancel the protection already granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and implemented by the Government. The petitioner’s service is therefore legally protected. 15. In view of this settled position of law, the impugned order dated 14.09.2023 (Annexure P/1), by which the petitioner’s services were terminated, is not sustainable. The termination order goes against binding court judgments and reopens an issue that has already been finally decided. Once the courts have granted protection and the matter has attained finality, the authorities cannot pass an order in violation of those directions. The impugned action is based on an incorrect understanding of the earlier Division Bench judgment and ignores the protection granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Therefore, the termination order deserves to be quashed. 16. As a result, the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement in service with continuity. However, in accordance with earlier Court directions, the petitioner shall be treated as a General Category employee from 28.11.2000 onwards for future service purposes. He shall not be entitled to take benefit of Halba tribe. The respondents are directed to restore the petitioner to service and grant all consequential benefits in accordance with law, preferably within a period eight weeks from the date of production of copy of this order. 5 17. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove. ” 3. Since the grievance of the petitioner is identical to the one considered in WPS No. 8211 of 2023 (Kishore Kumar Ninawe vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others) decided on 28.02.2026, and the petitioner in the present case is also seeking the same relief, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of and in line with the aforesaid judgment. 4. No order as to cost(s). sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha