1 CGHC010401782022 2026:CGHC:36270 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8815 of 2022 * - Smt. Yogita Sahu W/o Dinesh Kumar Sahu Aged About 33 Years Data Entry Facilator Zila Panchayat Durg, R/o Village Bohardih, P.S. Utai, Tahsil And District Durg (C.G.) ... Petitioner Versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Chief Secretary Govt. Of Chhattisgarh (Panchayat And Rural Development) Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhavan New Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector Durg District Durg (C.G.) 3 - The Director Chhattisgarh Social Audit Unite Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Regional Director Chhattisgarh Social Audit Unite Durg (C.G.) 5 - Pramod Dewangan District Social Auditor District Durg (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Arvind Kumar Dubey, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 4 For Respondent No. 5 : : Mr. Khulesh Sahu, Panel Lawyer Mr. S.B. Pandey, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 14/08/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble court be please to declare that the termination order dated 18/11/2022 without giving notice prior to termination and directed to execute work after termination is illegal and liable to be quashed in the interest of justice. 10.2 That the Hon’ble court be please to declare the termination of petitioner without giving opportunity of hearing Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.08.14 17:30:23 +0530 2 and termination without authority is illegal and be quashed in the interest of justice. 10.3 That this Hon’ble court be please to direct the respondents to pay back wages and dues/salary of four months which has not been paid till date of filing this petition. 10.4 That, any other relief(s) which the Hon’ble Court deems fit & proper may kindly be pleased to granted in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner was appointed to the post of Data Entry Facilator under the District Social Auditor, District Durg on 01.10.2018. He would contend that the services of the petitioner were discontinued by the said authority without following due procedure of law on 30.11.2022. He would contend that though the petitioner was not a regular employee, but respondent authorities should have afforded an opportunity before terminating the services of the petitioner. He would submit that a direction may be issued to the District Social Auditor, District Durg to reinstate the petitioner in services. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents would oppose. They would submit that the petitioner was never appointed pursuant to an advertisement in accordance with the constitutional mandate. They would contend that the petitioner has not placed either order of appointment or order of termination of service, therefore, this petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 5. It appears that the petitioner was engaged temporarily under the District Social Auditor, District Durg on 01.10.2018 and she worked for 3 long 04 years, but without affording any opportunity of hearing her services were discontinued. 6. As the petitioner could not place order of appointment or any material to substantiate the fact that she continuously worked with the said authority, therefore, this petition, at this juncture, is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to approach the concerned Labour Court or the Assistant Labour Officer or Collector claiming therein reinstatement with back wages. The petitioner would be at liberty to take all available grounds therein. If the petitioner approaches the concerned authorities or competent Court, it is expected that appropriate decision would be taken. 7. With the aforesaid direction(s), this petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti