1 CGHC010299022026 2026:CGHC:34735 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6012 of 2026 1 - Atul Kumar Ekka S/o Isidor Ekka Aged About 37 Years R/o Old Age Home, Chathirma, Bhagwanpurkhurd, Police Station - Gandhinagar, District Surajpur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director, Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - District Education Officer, Surajpur, District - Surajpur (C.G.) 4 - Block Education Officer, Block Surajpur, District - Surajpur (C.G.) 5 - Divisional Joint Director, Treasury Accounts And Pensions - Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent/ State : Mr. Anadi Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 07/08/2026 1. By the present petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction towards the respondent authorities for revocation of the AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2026.08.10 10:42:52 +0530 2 suspension order dated 28/08/2025 and for payment of full salary for the period of suspension. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was working as Teacher (LB) at Govt. Middle School Kailashpur, Block Surajpur, District Surajpur. On 28/08/2025, the respondent/department suspended the petitioner owing to the reason that an FIR was registered under Section 69 of BNS and pursuant thereto he was arrested. Thereafter, departmental enquiry was initiated and charge was issued against the petitioner vide Annexure P-2. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner filed CRMP before this Court and vide order dated 30/04/2026 in CRMP No.2834/2025, this Court quashed the FIR No.284/2025, which was registered against the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has submitted representation seeking revocation of the suspension order, but the same is still pending consideration before the competent authority. 3. Learned State counsel submits that if the representation submitted by the petitioner is pending consideration, the same shall be examined and decided by the competent authority in accordance with law, keeping in view the applicable circulars/ instructions of 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 respondents authorities to consider and decide the petitioner's representation (Annexure P-5) 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 Amardeep