1 CGHC010380222026 2026:CGHC:42100 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7121 of 2026 Saroj Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Manejar Yadav Aged About 32 Years R/o Village - Niyazipur, Post - Gangoli, Police Station - Simri, District Buxar Bihar ... Petitioner versus 1 - Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Home Affairs, Government Of India, North Block, New Delhi 2 - The Deputy Inspector General, Sector Headquarters (SHQ) Bengaluru, Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force (ITBP), Ministry Of Home Affairs, Government Of India, Sundarahalli Camp, Village - Sundarahalli, Post Office - Jangamakote, Taluka - Sidlaghatta, District - Chikkaballapur Karnataka 3 - The Commandant ‘A’ Company, 38 Battalion, Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force (ITBP) Camp, Manth, Police Station - Kharora, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Veer Verma, Advocate For Respondents/ UoI : Mr. R. K. Verma, DSGI SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2026.09.29 10:36:34 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 28/09/2026 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent authorities to consider and decide the departmental appeal dated 04.06.2026 (Annexure P-1) preferred by the petitioner against the order of dismissal from service, which is pending consideration before the respondent No.2. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, a Constable in the Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force (ITBP), was dismissed from service vide order dated 23.04.2026 in connection with the criminal case arising out of the incident dated 17.03.2025, which is presently pending trial. He submits that the petitioner has preferred a departmental appeal dated 04.06.2026 before respondent No.2 under Rule 28 of the ITBP Rules, 1994, against the said dismissal order, but the same is still pending consideration. He, therefore, prays for a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and decide the pending departmental appeal in accordance with law by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a stipulated period. 3. Learned DSGI appearing for respondents/ ITBP submits that if the departmental appeal (Annexure P-1) is still pending consideration, the same shall be considered and decided, in accordance with law, within the stipulated period. 3 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into account the submission made by learned DSGI, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2 to consider and decide the departmental appeal dated 04.06.2026 (Annexure P-1) filed by the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law, preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE $. Bhilwar