1 CGHC010150152021 2026:CGHC:37250 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2629 of 2021 • Shyam Lata Sahu D/o Shri Dashrath Lal Sahu Aged About 42 Years Presently Posted As Supervisor, Intergreted Child Development Project Sarkanda, (Bilha - 02), Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. Chhattisgarh Rajya Mahila Ayog Through Its President / Secretary, Rajya Mahila Ayog Shastri Chowk, Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Secretary, Department Of Women And Child Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. Director Department Of Women And Child Development Directorate, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4. Smt. Dirbee Sahu W/o Shri Kaushal Prasad Sahu Aged About 42 Years R/o Laxman Vihar Colony, House No. A - 17/18, Lavan Road, Baloda Bazar,. P.S. City Kotwali, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pawan Shrivastava, Advocate. For Resp. No. 1 For State/Res(s) : : Ms. Shruti Pramar, Advocate on behalf of Mr. A.S. Kachhawaha, Advocate Mr. Atanu Ghosh, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon’ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board 19/08/2026 1. Challenge in this writ petition is to the recommendation dated 27.03.2021 (Annexure P/1) whereby Respondent No.1/ C.G. Rajya Mahila Ayog (for short “Ayog”), has recommended to Respondent No.2 to initiate departmental enquiry and take necessary action under the provisions of PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 Civil Services (Conduct) Rules against the petitioner for her suspension. It was further recommended that if the allegations lavelled against the petitioner are found to be true then she shall be terminated from the services. 2. By way of this writ petition, petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- 10.1 That, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ and quash the impugned recommendation dated-27-03.2021 (Annexure-P/1) arising out from proceeding dated 19.03.2021, passed by Respondent No.1. 10.2 That, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ and stay the operation and effect of the impugned recommendation dated 27.03.2021 (Annexure-P/1) arising out from proceeding dated 19.03.2021 passed by Respondent No.1. 10.3 That, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in favour of the petitioner as per the facts & circumstance of the present case, in the interest of Justice. 3. Brief facts of the case are that Respondent No.1-Aayog has been constituted under the undivided State of Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh as Rajya Mahila Ayog Adhiniyam, 1955 (hereinafter “Adhiniyam, 1995”), a State Commission for Women and to provide for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto and the same has been adopted by the State of C.G. after its formation. Respondent No.4 is the wife of one Kaushal Prasad Sahu, posted as Transport Constable in the Transport Department and they got married on 21.05.2002 and out of their wedlock, three children were born and presently they are living with her husband Kaushal Prasad Sahu. Due to some family dispute going on between respondent No. 4 and Kaushal Prasad Sahu, on 20.11.2019 respondent No. 4 filed a complaint against Kaushal Prasad Sahu and his other family members under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from 3 Domestic Violence Act, 2005 before Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Baloda Bazar, upon which the matter has been placed before Pariwaar Paramarsh Kendra, Baloda Bazar, where the statement of Respondent No.4 and Kaushal Prasad Sahu was recorded and the matter has been sent to the Protection Officer. Thereafter, the matter has been sent to Judicial Magistrate First Class, Balodabazar wherein case was registered against the Kaushal Prasad Sahu and his family members under Section 12 of the Protection of Women for Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which is pending till now. On 26.05.2020, respondent No. 4 made a complaint before respondent No. 1-Ayog against Kaushal Prasad Sahu (her husband) alleging that her husband got married with petitioner, who is posted as Supervisor in the Woman and Child Development department, during his subsistence of his earlier marriage with respondent No. 4 and prayed to take action against him. After receiving of the complaint, respondent No. 1-Ayog vide letter dated 08.06.2020 requested the Superintendent of Police, Baloda Bazar to conduct enquiry and thereafter to submit its report. When no action has been taken in pursuance of the letter dated 08.06.2020, respondent No. 4 moved an application before Respondent No. 1 on 18.06.2020 providing address of petitioner, however, there is no mention of any action against petitioner but her husband Kaushal Prasad Sahu. Subsequently, on notice issued by respondent No. 1, Kaushal Prasad Sahu appeared before the Ayog on 16.03.2021 and on that date respondent No. 1 directed him to appear alongwith petitioner on the next date of hearing on 19.03.2021 and thereafter on the next date of hearing on 27.03.2021 respondent No. 1 has passed the impugned recommendation against petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that impugned recommendation dated 27.03.2021 passed by Respondent no.1 is without 4 jurisdiction, illegal, arbitrary and against the provision of law as the same has been passed without giving proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to file reply and also without following principles of natural justice. He submits that from the proceeding before respondent No. 1, it is clear that, petitioner appeared before the Ayog but she was not given time for filing her reply and respondent no.1 passed impugned order in arbitrary manner and therefore the recommendation impugned is liable to be set aside. He submits that before passing the impugned recommendation it ought to have been considered by Respondent no.1 that, there was no material available on record to substantiate the allegations levelled against the petitioner and still respondent no.1 has made impugned recommendation. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the Aayog has been constituted and working as per C.G. Rajya Mahila Ayog Adhiniyam, 1995, wherein under Chapter-III, the functions of the commission has been clearly defined but the impugned recommendation has been passed by respondent no.1 beyond its power and jurisdiction which therefore is liable to set aside. He submits that the Respondent No.4 filed her complaint before Respondent no.1 and on 08.06.2020, Respondent no.1 had issued direction to Superintendent of Police, Baloda Bazar, and requested to investigate the matter and submit the report within 15 days, but no inquiry has been conducted nor any report has been submitted by Superintendent of Police, Baloda Bazar in the matter and without having any inquiry report or documents, the respondent no.1 passed the impugned recommendation which is against the provisions of law. According to the powers defined in the Adhiniyam, 1995, the Ayog can recommend only to investigate the matter but in the present case, by the impugned recommendation, the Ayog has recommended for suspension 5 of petitioner and further recommended to terminate her from the services, which is without jurisdiction of the Ayog. Before passing the impugned recommendation, Respondent no.1 has not considered that the Respondent No.4 had filed a complaint of domestic violence before competent court of law against her husband and the same is pending, however, there is no material nor any complaint against petitioner as no prayer was made in the complaint filed by respondent No. 4 and therefore impugned recommendation passed against petitioner is arbitrary, illegal and in violation of statutory provisions of law. Lastly, he prays that this Writ Petition may be allowed and impugned recommendation may kindly be quashed/set aside. 6. Learned counsel for State/respondent submits that they are formal party in this petition and no relief has been sought against them. 7. Learned counsel for respondent No. 1-Ayog submits that Ayog is a statutory body and in exercise of the power conferred to it, proceeding has been drawn on the complaint filed by respondent No. 4 alleging that her husband Kaushal Prasad Sahu married petitioner during the subsistence of his earlier marriage with respondent No. 4 without obtaining a decree of divorce. For smooth functioning of the commission, and exercising its powers, respondent No. 1 issued notices and then the impugned recommendation has been passed. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available with the petition. 9. From the perusal of record, it appears that Respondent No.4 who is wife of the petitioner had filed a complaint before respondent No. 1-Ayog alleging that her husband Kaushal Prasad Sahu without giving divorce to her has solemnized second marriage with petitioner and the three children 6 which were born out of the relations of Kaushal Prasad and the complainant are also living with her husband and petitioner. It has been further alleged that her husband is also not providing maintenance to the complainant/Respondent No.4. 10.On the basis of complaint filed by Respondent No.4, the Aayog has made recommendations to the Chhattisgarh Government, Woman and Child Development Social Welfare Department, under which the petitioner is working as a Supervisor, to initiate a departmental enquiry against her and recommended her suspension as she has not done her duties in accordance with Civil Services (Conduct) Rules. It has been further recommended that after conducting departmental enquiry if the charges against the petitioner are found proved, then the petitioner may be terminated from the services. 11.In this regard, Section 10 of the Adhiniyam, 1995 deals with Functions of the Commission, which reads as under: “10.Functions of the Commission. (1) The Commission shall be perform all or any of the following functions, namely :- (a)investigate and examine all matters relating to the safeguards provided for women under the Constitution and other laws; (b) present to the State Government, annually and at such other times as the Commission may deem fit, reports upon the working of those safeguards; (c) take up the cases of violation of the provisions of the Constitution and of other laws relating to women with the appropriate authorities; (d)participate and advise on the planning process of socio- economic development of women; (e)fund litigation involving issues affecting a large body of women;(f)make in-depth studies on- (i)the economic, educational and health situation of the women of the State with particular emphasis on the tribal districts and areas which are underdeveloped with respect to women's 7 literacy, mortality and economic development; (ii)conditions in which women work in factories, establishments, construction sites and other similar situations, and recommend to the State Government on the basis of specific reports for improving the status of women in the said areas; (g)compile information, from time to time, on instances of all offences against women in the State, or in selected areas, including cases related to marriage and dowry, rape, kidnapping, abduction, eveteasing, immoral trafficking in women and cases of medical negligence in causing delivery or sterilisation or medical intervention that relates to child bearing or child birth; (h)co-ordinate with the State Cell and District Cells for atrocities against women, if any, for mobilisation of public opinion in the State as a whole or in specific areas which would help in speedy reporting and detection of offences of such atrocities and mobilisation of public opinion against the offenders: (i)receive complaints on- (i)atrocities on women and offences against women; (ii)deprivation of women of their rights relating to minimum wages, basic health and maternity rights; (iii)non-compliance of policy decisions of the State Government relating to women; (iv)rehabilitation of deserted and destitute women and women forced into prostitution; (v)atrocities on women in custody; and take up with authorities concerned appropriate remedial measures. (j)assist, train and orient the non-Government organisations in the State in legal counselling of poor women and enabling such women to get legal aid; (k)inspect or cause to be inspected a jail, remand home, women's institutions or other places of custody where women are kept as prisoners or otherwise and take up with the concerned authorities for remedial action, if found necessary; (l)perform functions relating to any other matter which may be referred to it by the State Government. (2)The State Government shall cause all the recommendations or reports, as may be presented to it by the Commission under sub- section (1), to be laid before the Legislature of the State alongwith a memorandum explaining the action taken or proposed to be taken on the recommendations of the Commission and the reasons for the non-acceptance, if any, of any of the such recommendations. (3)The Commission shall while investigating any matter referred to 8 in clause (1) or (i) of sub-section (1) have all the powers of a Civil Court trying a suit and in particular in respect of the following matters, namely :- (a)summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath; (b)requiring the discovery and production of any document; (c)receiving evidence on affidavits; (d)requisitioning any public record or copy thereof from any Court or office; (e)issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses and documents; and (f)any other matter which may be prescribed.” 12.The Chhattisgarh State Women Commission operates under the Chhattisgarh/Madhya Pradesh Rajya Mahila Ayog Adhiniyam, 1995. The Commission’s functions, as detailed under Section 10 of the Adhiniyam, 1995, include investigating and examining issues related to the safeguards provided for women under the Constitution and other laws. Presenting reports on the working of these safeguards to the State Government. Addressing violations of laws related to women by taking up matters with appropriate authorities. Advising the government on socio- economic development and welfare of women. Taking up cases of atrocities against women and advising on appropriate action. Assisting NGOs in legal counseling for underprivileged women and providing legal aid. 13.Importantly, the Commission is vested with powers to receive complaints in respect of commission of any offence against women, investigate and recommend actions but does not possess the authority to directly order disciplinary action such as suspension or termination of government employees. The recommendations made by the Commission are advisory in nature and should be directed towards ensuring legal remedies or prompting appropriate government action. 9 14.From the further perusal of the aforesaid functions of the Ayog, it appears that the Aayog if the complaint is found to be genuine one, can refer the same to the concerned authorities with only a recommendation that appropriate action be taken on the complaint made by the complainant. The Aayog is not vested with any powers to give specific recommendations in respect of initiation of departmental enquiry or suspension as also termination from services. 15.This Court in the matter of Bhupendra Kumar Sahu vs. State of Chhattisgarh in WPCR No.269 of 2021 decided on 06.08.2021 held in paragraph Nos.9 & 10 as under:- 9.From the perusal of function enumerated in Section 10 of the Act of 1995, it is quite vivid that the commission has to help the women in distress. The State Commission has been broadly assigned to take up studies on issues of economic, educational and health care that may help in overall development of the women of the State, gather statics concerning offences against women probe into the complaints relating to atrocities on women, deprivation on women of their rights in respect of minimum wages, basic health, maternity rights, etc. and ascertainment of facts take up the matter with the authorities concerned for remedial measures, help women in distress as a friend, philosopher and guide in enforcement of their legal rights. However, no power or authority has been given to the State Commission to adjudicate or determine the rights of the parties. 10. The power functions and authorities of the State Orissa commission for women has come up for consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Bhabani Prasad Jain Vs. State of Orissa Commission reported in (2010) 8 SCC 633, the Hon'ble Supreme Court after examined the function of the commission has held in Paras 9 and 10 as under:- "9. It would be seen from Section 10 of the 1993 Act that the State Commission has been authorized to take up studies in respect of economic educational and health situation of the women of the State and also the working conditions of women in the factories, establishments, construction sites and make its recommendations to the State Government. The State Commission is empowered to compile information in respect of the offences against 10 women and to coordinate with the State Cell and District Cells for atrocities against women. Further, the State Commission is competent to receive complaints in respect of the matters specified in Section 10(1)(d) and take up the grievances raised in the complaint/s with the concerned authorities for appropriate remedial measures. The State Commission is also given role of assisting, training and orienting the non Government organization in the State in legal counseling of poor women and enabling such women to get legal aid. Under clause (f) of Section 10(1), the State Commission is authorized to inspect or cause to be inspected, a jail, remand home, women's institution or other place of custody where women are kept as prisoners or otherwise and take up with the concerned authorities these matters for remedial action." 10.In other words, the State Commission is broadly assigned to take up studies on issues of economic, educational and healthcare that may help in overall development of the women of the State: gather statistics concerning offences against women; probe into the complaints relating to atrocities on women, deprivation of women of their rights in respect of minimum wages, basic health, maternity rights, etc. and upon ascertainment of facts take up the matter with the concerned authorities for remedial measures; help women in distress as a friend, philosopher and guide in enforcement of their legal rights. However, no power or authority has been given to the State Commission to adjudicate or determine the rights of the parties." 16.On the perusal of the impugned notice dated 27.03.2021, it appears that the Aayog has exceeded its jurisdiction while recommending the concerned Department to initiate departmental enquiry against the petitioner for violating Civil Services Conduct rules and it has recommended to the extent that in case charges levelled against the petitioner are found proved in the D.E., then she may be terminated from the services. 17.While the Ayog has the power to recommend that authorities to investigate matters relating to women’s rights and welfare, it is not empowered to make recommendations concerning departmental actions such as suspension or termination. The powers granted under Section 10 of the 11 Adhiniyam, 1995, do not extend to recommending suspension or termination of an employee. The Ayog’s role is limited to investigation and recommendation, not direct intervention in employment matters under Civil Service Conduct Rules. 18. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Bhabani Prasad Jena vs. Convenor Secretary, Orissa State Commission For Women and Another reported in (2010) 8 SCC 633, has clarified that the State Commission for Women is recommendatory and investigative in nature, not adjudicatory, and cannot pass binding judicial orders determining rights of parties and held in paragraph Nos.11 to 13 which reads as under:- 11. Mr Ranjan Mukherjee, learned counsel for Respondent 2 submitted that once a power has been given to the State Commission to receive complaints including the matter concerning deprivation of women of their rights, it is implied that the State Commission is authorised to decide these complaints. We are afraid, no such implied power can be read into Section 10(1) (d) as suggested by the learned counsel. The provision contained in Section 10(1)(d) is expressly clear that the State Commission may receive complaints in relation to the matters specified therein and on receipt of such complaints take up the matter with the authorities concerned for appropriate remedial measures. The 1993 Act has not entrusted the State Commission with the power to take up the role of a court or an adjudicatory tribunal and determine the rights of the parties. The State Commission is not a tribunal discharging the functions of a judicial character or a court. 12. Learned counsel for Respondent 2 then referred to Section 10(3) and submitted that the State Commission has been conferred with all the powers of a civil court trying a suit. We are afraid, this is not at all a proper reading of Section 10(3). The expression, “have all the powers of a civil court” in Section 10(3) is qualified by the following words, “in respect of the following matters”. That is to say, the State Commission has powers of civil court trying a suit for the matters 12 specified in clauses (a) to (f) thereof and not for other purposes. 13. It is clear to us that the legislature has not gone so far as to give jurisdiction to the State Commission to make an order such as the one that has been made. From whatever angle we may examine the validity of the directions given by the State Commission in its order dated 11-5-2009, it appears to us that the said order was outside the jurisdiction, power or competence of the State Commission. It was an order which the State Commission had no competence to make and, therefore, a void order. The High Court instead of correcting that order went a step further and directed that DNA test of the child as well as the appellant shall be conducted. 19.Further, in the matter of Smt. Asha Rai @ Asha Devi vs. Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran B.L.W. Through its Managing Director Varanasi and 3 others reported in 2018 SCC OnLine All 435, the Allahabad High Court held in paragraph Nos.5, which reads as under:- “5. In my opinion, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is thoroughly misconceived and misplaced and without any merit. The State Women Commission has absolutely no jurisdiction to interfere in the service matters of an employee which are governed by statutory rules and if the petitioner's husband has retired from service on 31.01.2006 and the petitioner has been continuing to occupy the official accommodation in a wholly illegal and unauthorised manner, State Women Commission cannot direct the Respondent-Authority not to evict the petitioner from the government accommodation.” 20.For the forgoing analysis and keeping in view the principles rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the opinion of this Court, impugned recommendation dated 27.03.2021 is per se illegal on the face of it and the same deserves to be and is accordingly quashed/set aside. 21.However, the respondent authorities i.e. Woman and Child Development, Social Welfare Department is at liberty to initiate any proceeding against the petitioner in this regard after following due process of law and after 13 affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 22.Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge pwn