1 CGHC010336502026 2026:CGHC:41239-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 886 of 2026 Ritik Raj Shrivastav S/o Shri Raj Kumar Shrivastav Aged About 21 Years Occupation - Service, Working As Fire Safety And Computer Operator (Daily Wager), Government District Hospital, Ambikapur, (Removed), R/o Near Holly Cross Hospital Road, Kedarpur, Ambikapur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh --- Appellant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Family Health And Welfare, New Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Secretary Department Of General Administration, New Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - The Joint Director And Superintendent Rajmata Srimati Devendra Kumari Singh Deo, Government Hospital Affiliated To Government Medical College, Ambikapur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh 4 - The Collector District Sarguja Chhattisgarh 5 - The Superintendent Of Police District Sarguja Chhattisgarh 6 - The Chief Medical And Health Officer Goverment Hospital, Ambikapur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh 2 7 - The Civil Surgeon Cum Chief Hospital Superintendent Government Hospital, Ambikapur, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh --- Respondents For appellant : Mr. A.N. Bhakta, Adv. with Mr. Vivek Bhakta, Adv. For Respondents : Mr. Prasoon Bhaduri, Dy. Adv. General Hon’ble Mr. Krushna Ram Mohapatra, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Santosh Sharma, Judge Order on Board Per : Krushna Ram Mohapatra, Chief Justice 22/09/2026 1. This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 21-7-2026 (Annexure A-1) passed by learned Single Judge in WPS No. 5488/2026, wherein the writ petition filed by the appellant (writ petitioner) has been dismissed. 2. WPS No. 5488/2026 was filed by the appellant assailing the communication dated 26-5-2026 (Annexure P-1 to the writ petition) issued by the respondent No. 7/the Civil Surgeon cum Chief Hospital Superintendent, Government Hospital, Ambikapur in the district of Sarguja, whereby the authority declined to issue character verification certificate to the appellant solely on the ground that, two FIRs have been registered against him. On the basis of said communication, the appellant’s engagement, who was continuing on daily wage basis (Collector rate) in Rajmata Shrimati Devendra Kumari Singh Deo Government Medical College, Ambikapur since September, 2025, came to an end. 3 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that, out of the two FIRs registered against the appellant, one was registered under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for brevity, ‘JJ Act’) and trial in respect of the 2nd FIR is going on. He therefore, submits that, the appellant should not have been denied issuance of character verification certificate. Due to denial of issuance of the character verification certificate, continuance of the appellant as daily wage employee (Collector rate) came to an end and the appellant was not given any further engagement as daily wage worker. It is his submission that, in the proceeding under the JJ Act, the appellant was censured, but the trial in respect of other FIR is still pending, thus, there was no impediment in issuance of character verification certificate in his favour. It is submitted that, learned Single Judge without taking into consideration these material aspects, passed the impugned order, which is perse illegal and is liable to be set aside. 4. Mr. Bhaduri, learned Dy. Advocate General appearing for the State, on the other hand, submits that, learned Single Judge has taken note of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant in the writ petition. In para 5 of the impugned order, it is observed as under :- “5. ……...Character verification is an administrative exercise undertaken to determine the suitability of a person for engagement in Government service, and the competent authority is entitled to take into consideration all relevant antecedents. Since the petitioner has no vested or statutory right to continue as a daily wager, this Court finds no arbitrariness or illegality in the decision of the respondents warranting interference in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.” 4 5. Learned Dy. Adv. General further submits that, the second FIR was registered when the appellant was continuing as daily wage employee. It is also submitted that, as per requirement, at the time of of entering as daily wage worker, the appellant was required to submit an undertaking that, no criminal case has either been decided or pending against him. It is also observed therein that, if the undertaking would be found to be incorrect, then the engagement of the appellant would be discontinued. Thus, the appellant also does not qualify Clause 4 of the undertaking given at the time of his engagement as a daily wage worker. Copy of the undertaking was also enclosed to the writ petition. He, therefore, submits that, the writ appeal merits no consideration and is liable to be dismissed. 6. Taking note of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the observations made by learned Single Judge, this Court finds that, two FIRs have been registered against the appellant. In respect of first FIR, the petitioner has already been convicted. As he was allegedly a juvenile at the time of commission of offence, he was censured only. The second FIR is still under trial. Thus, it has been rightly observed by learned Single Judge that, the appellant should not be engaged in a hospital when he has criminal antecedent. As such, we find no infirmity in the impugned order, which is a reasoned one. 7. Accordingly, the writ appeal being devoid of any merit, is dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Santosh Sharma) (Krushna Ram Mohapatra) Judge Chief Justice Pathak AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Digitally signed by AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Date: 2026.09.23 10:50:53 +0530