1 CGHC010287882026 2026:CGHC:32232 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5656 of 2026 Kausar Zaidi S/o Late Shri E. A. Zaidi, Aged About 34 Years (Sub- Engineer, Chhattisgarh Police Housing Corporation Limited) R/o. Sector-2, Shivanand Nagar, Shrinagar, Khamtarai, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Principal Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Managing Director, Chhattisgarh Police Housing Corporation Limited, Sector - 19, North Block Atal Nagar Police Headquarter Campus Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - General Manager (Finance), Chhattisgarh Police Housing Corporation Limited, Sector 19, North Block Atal Nagar Police Headquarter Campus Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Sumit Singh Rathore, Advocate alongwith Ms. Manisha Yadav, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Ms. Sakshi Bajpai, Panel Lawyer SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2026.07.28 17:43:08 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 28/07/2026 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent authorities to consider and decide the pending appeal dated 23.10.2025 (Annexure P-10) preferred by the petitioner before the respondent No.1. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who was working as a Sub-Engineer in the Chhattisgarh Police Housing Corporation (CGPHC), has challenged the termination order dated 01.10.2025 on the ground that the same has been passed pursuant to a departmental enquiry conducted in violation of the prescribed procedure and without properly considering his medical condition and leave applications. He submits that the petitioner's absence from duty was on account of serious medical ailments and, despite the department itself taking steps for regularization of his leave, his services came to be terminated. Being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred a statutory appeal dated 23.10.2025 before the respondent authority, which is still pending consideration despite repeated reminder representations. It is, therefore, prayed that respondent authorities be directed to consider and decide the petitioner's pending appeal expeditiously, in accordance with law. 3 3. Learned State counsel submits that if the appeal (Annexure P-10) is still pending consideration, the same shall be considered and decided, in accordance with law, within the stipulated period. 4. I have 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 taking into account the submission made by learned State counsel, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities, particularly respondent No.1 to consider and decide the appeal dated 23.10.2025 (Annexure P- 10) filed by the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law, preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE $. Bhilwar