1 CGHC010198232022 2026:CGHC:38145 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4165 of 2022 1 - M Vijay Kumar S/o M Raj Babu, Aged About 46 Years Secretary (Now Terminated), Village Panchayat Nagaram, Janpad Panchayat Konta, District : Sukuma, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Chief Executive Officer, District Panchayat Sukma, District : Sukuma, Chhattisgarh 3 - Commissioner, Division Bastar, Jagdalpur, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Pankaj Singh, Advocate For State : Mr. Abhishek Singh, PL For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Raghvendra Verma, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 25.08.2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking following relief (s) : “A. To quash/ set aside the order dated 09.11.2021, passed by the Respondent No. 3/Commissioner and all consequences arising thereof and related thereto including the order dated 27.01.2022, passed by the Respondent No. 2/CEO; and B. To quash/ set aside the order dated 29.10.2020, passed by the Respondent No. 2/CEO and all consequences arising thereof and related thereto; and -2- C.To grant/award back-wages and other benefits, financial and otherwise, arising out of and consequential to quashment of impugned orders; and D. Any other relief(s) in favor of Petitioner as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case with cost.” 2. Mr. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was appointed to the post of Secretary, Gram Panchayat Nagaram, Janpad Panchayat Konta, District Sukma (C.G.). He would further submit that the services of the petitioner have been terminated by respondent No.2/Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Sukma, vide order dated 29.10.2020, without following the procedure contemplated under Rule 7 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999. He would contend that respondent No.2 inflicted a major penalty but failed to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and conduct any enquiry. He would further contend that against the termination order dated 29.10.2020 passed by respondent No.2, an appeal was preferred by the petitioner before respondent No.3/Commissioner, which was dismissed vide order dated 09.11.2021. He would pray to allow this petition. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 would oppose submissions. Mr. Verma would submit that proper enquiry was conducted and the enquiry report was also submitted. He would refer to Annexure R-2/1, a document addressed to the Commissioner, Division Bastar, by the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Sukma. He would contend that the petitioner was 3 afforded sufficient opportunity of hearing and there were serious allegations against him; therefore, this petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. Mr. Singh, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State would contend that there is a dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.2. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 6. Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed to the post of Secretary, Gram Panchayat Nagaram, Janpad Panchayat Konta, District Sukma in accordance with the provisions of Section 69 of the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam. 7. Rule 7 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Service (Discipline and Appeal)Rules, 1999 is reproduced herein below : “7. Procedure for imposing major penalties.-(1) No order, imposing on a member of the Panchayat Service, any of the penalties specified in clause (iv) to (via) of rule 5 shall be passed except after a formal inquiry is held as far as may be, in the manner hereinafter provided. (2) When an order for formal inquiry has been made, the disciplinary authority shall frame Definite charges on the basis of allegations and shall communicate such charges, alongwith the statement of the allegations, to the member of the Panchayat Service and also require him to submit, within such time as may be specified a written statement of defence and also to state whether he desires to be heard in person. (3) The person against whom inquiry is to be held shall, for the purpose of preparing toe defence, be permitted to inspect and take extracts from such records as he may specify: Provided that such permission may be refused if, for reasons to be recorded in writing, in the opinion of -4- the Enquiry Officer such records are not relevant for the purpose or it is against the public interest to allow his access thereto. (4) On receipt of the written statement of defence or if any such statement is not received within the time specified, the disciplinary authority may himself enquire into such of the charges as are not admitted or appoint an Enquiry Officer to hold the inquiry and forward to him his report and, if advised, his recommendation alongwith all the inquiry papers. (5) The disciplinary authority may nominate any person to present the case in support of the charges before the Enquiry Officer. The member of the Panchayat Service may present his case with the assistance of any other Panchayat Servant of State Government Servant approved by the Enquiry Officer but may not engage a legal practitioner for the purpose. unless the person nominated by the disciplinary authority as aforesaid is a legal practitioner or unless the disciplinary authority having regard to the circumstances of the case so permits. (6) If the servant of the Panchayat Service desires to be heard in person, he shall be so heard. If he so destres or if the disciplinary authority so directs, an oral enquiry shall be held by the Enquiry Officer. At such inquiry evidence shall be heard as to such of the allegations as are not admitted and the person charged shall be entitled to cross examine the witness, to give evidence In. person, to produce documentary evidence, if any, and to have such witness called as he may wish: Provided that the Enquiry Officer may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, refuse to call a witness. (7) At the conclusion of the inquiry, the Enquiry Officer shall prepare a report of the inquiry, recording his findings on each of the charges together with reasons therefor. (8) The proceedings conducted against the persons charged shall contain a sufficient record of (i) the charges framed against such person and the statement of allegations: (ii) the written statement of defence if any: (iii) the oral evidence taken in the course of the inquiry: (iv) the documentary evidence considered in the course of the inquiry- 5 (v) the orders, if any, made by the Enquiry Officer or the discipli-nary authority as the case may be with regard to the inquiry: (vi) a report setting out the findings on each charge and the reasons therefor. (9) the Enquiry Officer, if he is other than the disciplinary authority. shall submit the records of the proceedings mentioned in clause (8) above to the disciplinary authority without recommendation relating to the penalty to be imposed. The disciplinary authority shall consider the record of the enquiry and its findings on each charge, having regard to the findings on the charges and the record (if the proceedings) if he is of the opinion that any of the penalties specified in clauses (iv) to (vii) of rule 5 should be imposed, it shall furnish to the person charged a copy of the report of the Enquiry Officer, and where the disciplinary authority is not the Enquiry Officer a statement of its findings together with brief reasons for disagreement, if any, with the findings of the Enquiry Officer. (10) The disciplinary authority shall consider the representation, if any, made by the person charged in response to the notice and determine the penalty, if any, should be imposed and shall pass appropriate order on the case. (11) The orders passed by the disciplinary authority shall be communi-cated to the member of the Panchayat Service, who shall also be supplied with a copy of the report of the Enquiry Officer an where, disciplinary authority is not the Enquiry Officer, a statement of its findings together with the brief reasons for disagreement, if any, with the findings of the Enquiry Officer, unless they have already been supplied to the person charged.” According to the provisions of Rule 7 of the Rules of 1999, the disciplinary authority has to frame definite charges on the basis of allegations and he has to communicate such charges along with the statement of the allegations to the member of the Panchayat Service. Such a member of the Panchayat Service would be permitted to inspect and take extracts from such records. After receipt of the written statement of defence, the disciplinary authority may himself enquire into the charges. The disciplinary -6- authority may nominate any person to present the case before the Enquiry Officer. The member of the Panchayat service may present his case with the assistance of any other Panchayat Servant. After the conclusion of the inquiry, the Inquiry Officer has to prepare a report of the inquiry, recording his findings on each of the charges together with reasons. The Enquiry Officer has to submit its report before the disciplinary authority, thereafter, the disciplinary authority on the basis of documents and findings recorded in the inquiry report may take an appropriate decision. The disciplinary authority has to consider the representation, if any, made by such a member of the Panchayat service. The order passed by the disciplinary authority would be communicated to the member of the Panchayat service. 8. In the present case, respondent No.2, in its return, has failed to demonstrate that an article of charge was issued to the petitioner, an opportunity of hearing was afforded to him to file reply, the allegations made against the petitioner were proved by the witnesses, or any evidence was collected to prove the guilt of the petitioner. It has also not been demonstrated that an enquiry report was submitted and, subsequently, the petitioner was afforded an opportunity to submit his response to the enquiry report. Therefore, the termination order dated 29.10.2020 vide Annexure P/6 and subsequent order passed by the Commissioner dated 09.11.2021 are not sustainable in the eyes of law. Accordingly, both the orders are hereby quashed. The petitioner shall be reinstated in service forthwith. Respondent No.2 would be at liberty to initiate a 7 departmental enquiry, if so advised, strictly in accordance with law. 9. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha