1 CGHC010095482020 2026:CGHC:33494 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1920 of 2020 Monika Chandrakar, D/o. Mr. Shatrughan Lal Chandrakar, Aged About 22 Years, R/o. Ward No.1, Purani Basti, Ferfoud, Thana Arang, Block Arang, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - National Health Mission, Raipur, Through The Mission Director, Sector 27, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3- Collector, Collectorate Premises, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Chief Medical And Health Officer, Behind D K Hospital, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Raghavendra Pradhan, Advocate For Respondents No.1, 3 & 4 : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, Panel Lawyer for the State For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Sahdev Yadav, Advocate on behalf of Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2026.08.03 17:25:49 +0530 2 (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 03.08.2026 1. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 20.02.2020 passed by the respondent No.4, by which, the appointment order of the petitioner was declared null and void. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner served with a notice and without affording an opportunity of hearing, his appointment has been annulled. 3. Learned State counsel supports the impugned order dated 20.02.2020 and submits that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions, and perused the record minutely. 5. The impugned order is stigmatic in nature and was issued without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, therefore, the impugned order dated 20.02.2020 is quashed. The contractual period of the petitioner has already come to an end, therefore, petitioner is not entitled to any further relief. In view of the above, the petitioner is entitled to make an application for his appointment, if any, before the competent authority in accordance with law. 3 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed to the above-extent. No cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Ashok Judge