1 / 3 2026:CGHC:12030 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2401 of 2026 Smt. Poonam Sharma W/o Dharmendra Sharma Aged About 39 Years Working As Patwari, P.H. No. 07, Village Office Otagan, Tehsil-Tilda, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Resident Of Professor Colony, Sector-1, Street No. 2, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan New Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Commissioner Raipur Division, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Collector Bhu Abhilekh Section, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - The Tehsildar Tilda, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Mr. Palash Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 13.03.2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs: “10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the 2 / 3 respondent authorities to grant full pay and allowances for the aforesaid suspension period along with all consequential benefits including annual increments, continuity of service, seniority and other service advantages in accordance with Rule 54 of the Fundamental Rules.; in the interest of justice. 10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to decide the representations (Annexure P/9) of the petitioner within stipulated time, in the interest of justice. 10.3 Any other relief which the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances may also be provided to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner while working on the post of Patwari was subjected to the criminal prosecution. After registration of criminal case against the petitioner, he was suspended. Upon conclusion of the trial, petitioner was acquitted and thereafter, he was reinstated in service, however, no decision has been taken with respect to the suspension period. Petitioner had submitted representation on 06.11.2024 and 02.05.2025 (Annexure-P/9), which is pending consideration, therefore, direction be issued to concerned authorities to take decision on the representation submitted by the petitioner, at the earliest, within specified time frame. 3. Claim of the petitioner is that, petitioner was reinstated in service after suspension, however, decision is not taken as provided under Rule 54 of the Fundamental Rules. Rule 54 is of the Fundamental Rules, is extracted below for ready reference. “Rule 54 – Pay and allowances on reinstatement (1) When a Government servant who has been dismissed, removed or compulsorily retired is reinstated as a result of appeal or review, or would have been so reinstated but for his retirement on 3 / 3 superannuation while under suspension or pending appeal, the authority competent to order reinstatement shall consider and make a specific order— (a) regarding the pay and allowances to be paid to the Government servant for the period of absence from duty, and (b) whether or not the said period shall be treated as a period spent on duty. (2) Where the authority competent to order reinstatement is of the opinion that the Government servant has been fully exonerated, or that the suspension was wholly unjustified, the Government servant shall be given full pay and allowances to which he would have been entitled had he not been dismissed, removed or compulsorily retired, subject to any deductions for subsistence allowance already paid. (3) In other cases, the Government servant shall be given such proportion of pay and allowances as the competent authority may prescribe, and the period of absence shall not be treated as duty unless the authority specifically directs otherwise. (4) In a case falling under sub-rule (2), the period of absence shall be treated as a period spent on duty for all purposes.” 4. In view of the specific prayer made by counsel for the petitioner and further considering the Rule 54 of the Fundamental Rules, the writ petition, at this stage, is disposed of, directing respondent No. 3 and 4 to take decision on the representation submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a further period of three months from the date of receipt of the Order. 5. Accordingly, with the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Saurabh JUDGE