1 CGHC010357532025 2026:CGHC:36536 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 9761 of 2025 Ajay Kumar Bajpai S/o Late Shri Nandan Prasad Bajpai Aged About 61 Years R/o Central Jail, Ambikapur, District Surguja C.G. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur C.G. 2 - The Under Secretary (Home Jail) Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur C.G. 3 - The Director General, Jail And Correctional Services, Chhattisgarh, Headquarter Jail And Correctional Services, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur C.G. 4 - The Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission, Through Its Secretary, North Block, Sector- 19, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur C.G. ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Mr. Vivek Verma, Govt. Advocate For Respondent No.4 : Mr. Siddhant Das, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Gary Mukhopadhyay, Advocate SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2026.08.19 10:30:50 +0530 2 (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 17/08/2026 1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 02.06.2025 (Annexure P/1) passed by the appellate authority, whereby his departmental appeal has been dismissed and the order of punishment dated 08.09.2014 imposing the minor penalty of censure has been affirmed, pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in WPS No. 2641/2016. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who was imposed a penalty of censure vide order dated 08.09.2014, preferred a departmental appeal, which was rejected vide order dated 05.05.2016 without consideration of the merits of the case. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner approached this Court in WPS No. 2641/2016, which was allowed vide order dated 29.01.2025, setting aside the order dated 05.05.2016 and remitting the matter to Respondent No.1/ Secretary, Home Department, State of Chhattisgarh for fresh consideration in accordance with Rule 27(2) of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 (for short, “the Rules of 1966”). Pursuant thereto, the petitioner submitted his representation and written submissions before the appellate authority. However, vide the impugned order dated 02.06.2025, the appeal has again been dismissed without assigning any reasons or recording findings on the grounds raised by the petitioner. It is, therefore, submitted that 3 the impugned order is a non-speaking order and is contrary to the specific directions issued by this Court. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that the departmental proceedings were conducted in accordance with the Jail Manual and the provisions of the Rules of 1966, and the petitioner was duly afforded an opportunity of hearing. It is submitted that the petitioner was imposed with the minor penalty of censure vide order dated 08.09.2014, which was affirmed by the appellate authority vide order dated 05.05.2016. Thereafter, pursuant to the order passed by this Court in WPS No. 2641/2016, the appeal was reconsidered and, after taking into account the grounds raised by the petitioner, was dismissed vide impugned order dated 02.06.2025. He further submits that no procedural irregularity or violation of the principles of natural justice has been demonstrated in the present case. Accordingly, the present writ petition, being devoid of merit, deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. From perusal of the earlier order dated 05.05.2016 and the order passed by this Court in WPS No. 2641/2016 on 29.01.2025, it appears that this Court had directed the Secretary, Department of Home, to consider the appeal pending before him and decide the same in accordance with Rule 27(2) of the Rules of 1966, after considering afresh the grounds raised by the petitioner in his appeal. 4 6. However, from perusal of the impugned order dated 02.06.2025, it appears that the appeal has been decided by the Under Secretary and that, except for reproducing the earlier order of rejection, the grounds raised by the petitioner have not been duly considered in the manner directed by this Court. 7. Once this Court had specifically directed the Secretary, Department of Home, to consider and decide the appeal afresh in accordance with Rule 27(2) of the Rules of 1966, the said direction was required to be complied with in its true letter and spirit. The appeal could not have been disposed of by merely reiterating the earlier order of rejection. 8. In these circumstances, the impugned order dated 02.06.2025 (Annexure P/1) cannot be sustained and is hereby set aside. The matter is accordingly remitted to the Secretary, Department of Home, who shall consider the petitioner's departmental appeal afresh, strictly in accordance with Rule 27(2) of the Rules of 1966, after taking into consideration all the grounds raised by the petitioner in his appeal. 9. The Secretary, Department of Home, shall pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 10. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE $. Bhilwar