1 2026:CGHC:7624 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2787 of 2020 1 - Mandeep Lahre S/o Shri Somaru Ram Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Mahuli, Block Wadrafnagar, Balrampur, District Balrampur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Department Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Commissioner Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Council (Mgnrega), Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector Cum District Programme Co-Ordinator Mgnrega, Balodabazar- Bhatapara, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh 4 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, , Balodabazar-Bhatapara, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh 5 - Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Kasdol, , District Balodabazar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Smt. Meena Shastri, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Anmol Sharma, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent No.4 : Shri Anuroop Panda, Advocate. KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date: 2026.02.12 16:21:54 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal , J Order On Board 11/02/2026 1. The petitioner is challenging the impugned order dated 22.5.2020 (Annexure P/1) whereby the petitioner has been terminated from service. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Technical Assistant on a contract basis by order dated 17.1.2018 (Annexure-P/4). However, by order dated 21.4.2020, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner as to why his services may not be terminated. In response to the show cause notice, the petitioner has admitted his lapses and his explanation was not found satisfactory and as such, the impugned order dated 22.5.2020 terminating the services of the petitioner has been passed, against which the present Writ Petition has been preferred. However, the order of termination dated 22.5.2020 (Annexure-P/1) has been stayed by this Court on 17.7.2020. In the meanwhile, the period of contract appointment is already over. 3. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that nothing survives for adjudication and the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, it is made clear that the impugned order dated 22.5.2020 will not come in way of the petitioner in future employment and the petitioner will not be entitled to continue further on the strength of impugned order. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Barve