1 CGHC010273322026 2026:CGHC:31445 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5557 of 2026 Smt. Savita Tandon (Suspended) W/o Satish Chandra Mahish Aged About 47 Years Occupation Supervisor, Department Of Mahila Avam Bal Vikas, R/o E-10, Parshuram Nagar, Puraina, Post Ravi Gram, Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Department Of Mahila Avam Bal Vikas, Through Its Principal Secretary, Mantralay Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director, Mahila Bal Vikas, Indravati Bhawan, Block- 1, 2nd Floor, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, Raipur Distt. Raipur C.G. 3. Collector Raipur (Women And Child Development Branch ) Dist. Raipur C.G. 4. District Programme Officer Mahila Avam Bal Vikas, Old Police Head Quarter, G. E. Road, Raipur Dist. Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Yogesh Pandey, Advocate For Respondent/ State : Mr. Aditya Tiwari, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 23/07/2026 1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs :- “i) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 15.01.2026 (Annexure P/1) and JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2026.07.25 11:19:43 +0530 2 21.05.2026 (Annexure P/ in in the interest of justice and the respondents be directed to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits. (ii) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deem fit may also be granted..” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, while serving as Supervisor was placed under suspension vide order dated 15.01.2026. He further submits that against the suspension order the petitioner has filed appeal which was rejected. He therefore prays that the petitioner may be permitted to file a fresh representation for revocation of the suspension order and the said representation may be considered and decided within a stipulated period. 3. Learned State counsel submits that although the petitioner's earlier appeal questioning the suspension order has already been rejected, if the petitioner submits a fresh representation raising all the available grounds, the same shall be duly considered and decided by the competent authority in accordance with law, taking into consideration the applicable circulars/instructions issued by the State Government as well as the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, within a reasonable period. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 3 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 concerned/ respondent to consider and decide the petitioner's representation in accordance with law, on its own merits, expeditiously, preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a 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