1 CGHC010284002026 2026:CGHC:36965 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6039 of 2026 Chanda Bai Patel W/o Lal Mohan Patel Aged About 47 Years Block Coordinator Mitanin Program Of State Health Resources Center Block Pusaur, R/o Telipali, Loharsingh District Raigarh C.G. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary Health And Medical Services Department Mantralaya, New Raipur District Raipur C.G. 2 – Director, State Health System Resource Center (SHSRC) Earlier Known As State Heath Resource Center (SHRC) Located At First Floor State Health Training Centre Building Bijli, Office Chowk, Near Kalibadi Raipur District Raipur C.G. 3 – Director, National Health Mission Swasthya Bhawan 3rd, Floor, Sector-19, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar Raipur District Raipur C.G. 4 - Chief Medical And Health Officer, Dantewada District South Baster Dantewada C.G. 5 - Block Medical Officer, Block Pusaur, District Raigarh C.G. ... Respondent(s) SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2026.08.19 18:14:11 +0530 2 (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Anand Pandey, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Ms. Apurva Nigam, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.3 : Mr. C.J.K. Rao, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 18/08/2026 1. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was working as a Block Coordinator under the Mitanin Programme since 2011 and was discharging her duties diligently. It is submitted that, vide order dated 08.05.2017, respondent No.5 removed her from service on the basis of an alleged complaint regarding collection of money from Mitanins, relying upon a summary inquiry dated 21.02.2017. Learned counsel submits that the impugned order was passed without issuance of show-cause notice, without affording an opportunity of hearing and without conducting a proper departmental inquiry, in violation of the principles of natural justice and the procedure prescribed under the circular dated 24.09.2011. It is further submitted that the mandatory five-member Committee did not submit its report nor was the decision taken by majority. Despite the representation submitted by the petitioner, no action has been taken; hence, the present petition. 2. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State as well as the counsel for the respondent No.3 would oppose the submissions 3 made by counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel would submit that sufficient opportunity was afforded to the petitioner. They would contend that a show-cause notice was issued and thereafter, enquiry was conducted but they would fairly submit that the decision was not taken by the five-member Committee to remove the petitioner, according to scheme. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on record. 4. From a bare perusal of the provisions of Circular dated 24.09.2011, wherein the procedure with regard to removal of Mitanin is described, it is quite vivid that if the work of Mitanin is not satisfactory, reports would be submitted by the Committee of five-member presided over by the Block Medical and Health Officer. After submission of report, a separate decision will be taken and there should be concurrence of at least three-members out of five-members with regard to removal. 5. In the present case, the order of removal has been passed by the Block Medical Officer alone, therefore, the order is contrary to the scheme dated 24.09.2011. Accordingly, the order dated 08.05.2017 is hereby quashed. 6. The petitioner would be at liberty to make representation before the Competent Authority for payment of arrears of salary. The respondent authorities would be at liberty to initiate a fresh enquiry strictly in accordance with the provisions of circular dated 4 24.09.2011, if so advised. 7. With the aforesaid direction and observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE $. Bhilwar