1 CGHC010343362026 2026:CGHC:39429 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6622 of 2026 Manesh Kumar Dhruw S/o Shri Shiv Kumar Dhruw Aged About 40 Years Presently Working As Teacher, L.B. Grade, Posted At Government Upper Primary School, Kochwahi, Block Harharpur, District Uttar Bastar Kanker, (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of School Education, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, (C.G.)-492002 2. Joint Director Education Division Bastar, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh 3. District Education Officer District Uttar Bastar Kanker, (C.G.) 4. Block Education Officer Block Narharpur, District Uttar Bastar Kanker, (C.G.) 5. Block Education Officer Block Durgkondal District- Uttar Bastar Kanker, (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. R.K. Verma, Advocate For Respondent/ State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 09/09/2026 1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs :- JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2026.09.11 11:51:52 +0530 2 “(a) issue a writ of certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, calling for the records relating to the impugned order of suspension dated 21.02.2026 (Annexure P-6) passed by Respondent No. 2, and quash and set aside the same; (b) issue a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondents to forthwith reinstate the Petitioner in service, with all consequential and attendant benefits, including full salary, seniority and continuity of service; (c) in the alternative, and without prejudice to prayers (a) and (b), declare that the continued suspension of the Petitioner beyond ninety days from the date of the order of suspension, without any reasoned order of extension and without service of the Memorandum of Charges, is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary v. Union of India, (2015) 7 SCC 291, and as applied by this Hon'ble Court in Manisha Pathak v. State of Chhattisgarh (W.A. No. 456 of 2022, decided 09.09.2022), and consequently direct the Respondents to reinstate the Petitioner; 3 (d) direct the Respondents to forthwith supply to the Petitioner a copy of the Memorandum of Charges, if any, and the order appointing the Inquiry Officer, and to conclude the departmental enquiry, if any, expeditiously and in accordance with law; (e) pass any other order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, while serving as a Teacher, was placed under suspension vide order dated 21.02.2026. He further submits that the petitioner may be permitted to submit a fresh representation before the competent authority for redressal of his grievances regarding revocation of suspension and prays that a direction may be issued to the concerned authority to consider and decide the same within a stipulated period. 3. Learned State counsel submits that, in the event the petitioner submits a fresh representation, the same shall be considered and decided by the competent authority in accordance with law, keeping in view the applicable circulars/instructions issued by the State Government as well as the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, within a reasonable period. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 4 5. Considering the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation before the competent authority within a period of 15 days from today. In the event such representation is submitted within the aforesaid period, the competent authority shall consider and decide the same, on its own merits and in accordance with law, on its own merits, preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the representation. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner, and the competent authority shall take an independent decision strictly in accordance with law. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE Jyoti