1 2026:CGHC:14631 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5903 of 2021  Pawan Kumar Salam S/o Shri Sukaluram Salam, Aged About 39 Years R/o Village And Post Benur, Police Station - Benur, Tahsil And District - Narayanpur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Home (Police) Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Police Station And Post - Rakhi, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2. The Director General / Home Guard And Citizen Protection, Head Quarter, Police Station And Post - Rakhi, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3. The Divisional Commandant (Office Of Divisional Commandant), Bastar Division, Jagdalpur District Bastar Chhattisgarh 4. The District Commandant, (Office Of District Commandant), Home Guard Narayanpur District - Narayanpur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. Varsha Sharma, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Abhishek Pandey, Advocate For State : Mr. Topilal Bareth, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 27.03 .2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):- “10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for entire records pertaining to the case of petitioner for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2026.03.30 14:22:19 +0530 2 pleased to direct respondent No.3 i.e. Divisional Commandant, Jagdalpur & respondent No.4 i.e. District Commandant, Narayanpur to decide the claim of petitioner for revocation from suspension according to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ajay Choudhary (SUPRA). 10.3 Any other relief (s) that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of this case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was a Home Guard working under the respondent No. 4, has been placed under suspension vide order dated 27.03.2021. She would contend that till date the suspension order has not been revoked. She would contend that the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation before respondent No. 4 in light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ajay Kumar Choudhary vs. Union of India through its Secretary and another, reported in (2015) 7 SCC 291, and in turn, respondent No. 4 may be directed to decide it in objective manner. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose. 4. Heard. 5. Taking into consideration limited prayer made by the petitioner, this petition is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to make a representation before the respondent No. 4, and in turn, the said authority is directed to decide it expeditiously in objective manner, preferably within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order in light of judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ajay Kumar Choudhary (supra). 6. With the aforesaid observation(s), and direction(s), the instant petition is 3 hereby disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE $iddhant