1 CGHC010316132026 2026:CGHC:39160 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6525 of 2026 Lata Miri W/o Kamlesh Miri Aged About 36 Years R/o Village- Churtela, Gobra, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, New Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 – Director, Panchayat, Directorate Vikas Bhawan Bhutal Narth Block Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Zila Panchayat Janjgir-Champa Through- Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Janjgir-Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 4 - Janpad Panchayat Dabhra Through Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Dabhra, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 5 - District Education Officer, Sakti District- Sakti (C.G.) 6 - Block Education Officer, Dabhra District- Sakti (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2026.09.10 11:05:46 +0530 2 For Petitioner : Mr. Syed Ishhadil Ali, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. K.G. Yadav, Dy. Govt. Advocate (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 07/09/2026 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks quashment of the impugned order dated 25.08.2023 (Annexure P/1), whereby his services have been treated as deemed resigned on account of unauthorized absence, and further seeks a direction to count the period of absence as service period for all purposes, along with appropriate compensation and costs. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade-III on 19.08.2007 and her services were regularized on 04.03.2014. He submits that due to prolonged illness, the petitioner remained absent from duty and, after obtaining fitness certificates from the District Medical Board, made repeated attempts to join, but her joining was not accepted by the respondent authorities. It is further submitted that despite repeated representations and the directions issued by this Court vide order dated 05.10.2023 in WPS No.7847/2023, the petitioner has not been taken back in service and the order has not been complied with, which led to filing of Contempt Case No. CONT/1371/2024, which is still pending. 3 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. 4. Upon consideration of the record, this Court finds that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing WPS No.7847/2023, wherein the petitioner had sought for the following relief :- “10.1) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the impugned order dated 25.08.2023 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent No.03 and further allowed the petitioner to join the duty. 10.2) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue the direction for the respondent authorities to count absent period as service period for all purpose. 10.3) Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 5. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 05.10.2023. The same reads thus :- “1. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this writ petition may be disposed of directing the concerned respondents- authorities to consider and decided the pending representation of the petitioner, at the earliest within specified time. 2. Learned State Counsel submits that he is having no objection to the limited prayer made by learned counsel 4 for the petitioner. 3. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 4. Considering facts of the case, limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and not opposed by State Counsel, writ petition is disposed of at this stage directing respondent Nos.3 and 4 to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner dated 09.06.2023 (Annexure P-6), in accordance with law and relevant rules, expeditiously preferably within an outer limit of ‘three months’ from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Certified as per rules.” 6. Despite challenging the impugned order dated 25.08.2023 in the aforesaid writ petition, the petitioner again challenges the same impugned order 25.08.2023 in the present writ petition, whereby her services have been treated as deemed resigned on account of unauthorized absence, and seeks consequential reliefs. 7. Having considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case and, particularly when the petitioner has already challenged the impugned order dated 25.08.2023 and further considering the fact that the he has initiated contempt proceedings alleging non- compliance of the order passed in WPS No.7847/2023 and the said proceedings are still pending, the present petition, arising out of the same facts and cause of action, cannot be entertained at this stage. 5 8. It is well settled that when a petitioner has already availed a remedy on the same set of facts and cause of action, a fresh writ petition seeking substantially the same relief cannot be entertained, particularly when the earlier proceedings are still pending. In the present case, as the petitioner has already initiated contempt proceedings alleging non-compliance of the order passed in the earlier writ petition, no fresh interference is warranted in exercise of writ jurisdiction. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed at the motion stage itself as not maintainable. 10. However, liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to pursue the contempt proceedings pending before this Court. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE $. Bhilwar