1 / 3 CGHC010328252026 2026:CGHC:37958 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6318 of 2026 Thukel Ram Markam S/o Punau Ram Markam Aged About 50 Years R/o Village - Rengakathera, Post - Changurda, District - Khairagarh - Chhuikhadan - Gandai (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Commissioner Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, Vikas Bhawan, 3rd Floor, Sector-19, North Block, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector Khairagarh, District - Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) 4 - Chief Executive Officer District Panchayat, Khairagarh, District - Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) 5 - Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat, Khairagarh, District - Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Veer Verma, Advocate For State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru) Order on Board 24/08/2026 ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2026.08.25 11:00:15 +0530 2 / 3 1. The petitioner has called in question the order dated 19.11.2025, whereby his services as Gram Rozgar Sahayak, Gram Panchayat Changurdi, District Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai, were brought to an end. 2. At the outset, it is brought to the notice of this Court by the State counsel that against the aforesaid order dated 19.11.2025, the petitioner had already preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, Vikasit Bharat-G RAM G, Raipur, on 06.05.2026. The said appeal was registered as Appeal Case No. 02/2026-27 and has been decided by the Commissioner vide order dated 03.08.2026, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed. Copy of the order dated 03.08.2026 is taken on record. 3. The aforesaid material fact has not been disclosed by the petitioner in the present writ petition. On the contrary, the petitioner has presented the petition as if the order dated 19.11.2025 continues to remain the operative and unchallenged order, despite the fact that the statutory/appellate remedy availed by him has already culminated in an order dated 03.08.2026. 4. More importantly, the order dated 03.08.2026 passed by the Commissioner dismissing the appeal has not been challenged in the present writ petition. Thus, the petitioner seeks to assail the original order while suppressing the subsequent appellate order which has attained finality so far as the present proceedings are concerned. Such suppression of a material fact disentitles the petitioner to invoke the 3 / 3 discretionary and equitable jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. SD/- SD/-D/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE ashu