1 CGHC010110132022 2026:CGHC:35581 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2247 of 2022  Omprakash Shahare S/o Dagoli Shahare Aged About 44 Years R/o Niwasi Sai Gali Kostipara Ward No. 18, Aanganbadi Ke Samne, Nimje Kirana Dukan Ke Pass Tulsipur, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Directorate Of Higher Education, Indrawati Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. Vice Chancellor Hemchand Yadav University, Durg, Raipur Naka, District Durg, Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 4. Principal Government Lal Chakradhar Shah College, Ambagarh Chowki, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. Pragya Pandey, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Navin Shukla, Advocate For State : Mr. Arpit Agrawal, P.L. For Respondent No. 3 : Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 2 12.8.2026 1) By way of this petition, petitioner has sought following reliefs :- (i) That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record relating to his case. (ii) That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash/set-aside the impugned termination order dated 01.05.2018 issued by the respondent no. 4 (Annexure-P/1). (iii) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was appointed as Guest Faculty under Government Lal Chakradhar Shah College for one academic session vide order dated 25.10.2017. She further submits that services of petitioner were terminated vide order dated 1.5.2018 without holding any inquiry and affording opportunity of hearing. She also submits that there were no allegations of misconduct against the petitioner therefore the order dated 1.5.2018 deserves to be quashed. 3) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents would oppose. They submit that petitioner was appointed as Guest Faculty vide order dated 25.10.2017 pursuant to circular issued by the State Government dated 1.7.2017 for one academic session. They further submit that after completion of one academic session, services of petitioner were discontinued vide order dated 1.5.2018 and since the said order is neither stigmatic nor punitive in nature, therefore there was no need to conduct any 3 inquiry. They also submit that this petition deserves to be dismissed. 4) Heard. 5) Admittedly, petitioner was appointed as Guest Faculty under respondent No. 4 vide order dated 25.10.2017 pursuant to circular dated 1.7.2017. It appears that petitioner was engaged for one academic session on honorarium basis and decision was taken by the respondent No. 4 on 1.5.2018 to discontinue the services of petitioner after completion of the academic session. 6) Therefore, in my opinion, the impugned order is neither stigmatic not punitive in nature, rather it is an order of discontinuation of service and there was no occasion for the respondent authorities to conduct any inquiry. 7) Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts, no case is made out for interference. Consequently, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. 8) No order as to cost(s). 9) Interim relief is hereby vacated. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.08.12 16:24:58 +0530