1 2026:CGHC:17485 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2720 of 2025 1 - Arun Kumar Mishra S/o Late R.N. Mishra Aged About 63 Years Retired Cashier Cum Clerk C.G. Rajya Gramin Bank R/o At Near Tv Tower, Atarmuda Raigarh, Distt Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank Through General Manager Head Office - Section 27, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank Through Regional Manager - Regional Office 3 Floor, Maa Bhagwati Complex, Near Shyam Petrol Pump Dhimrapur Road, Raigarh Chahttisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri K.N.Nande, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Shri Sabyasachi Bhaduri, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Path Prateem Sahu) Order on Board 16/04/2026 In the present petition, the petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court seeking the following reliefs: SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2026.04.20 12:03:18 +0530 2 10.1. The order passed by the respondent No.2 AS Annexure P/1 dated 19.03.2025 may be quashed and set aside. 10.2. The Hon’ble Court may be kind enough to call the entire record pertaining to the departmental enquiry of the petitioner. 10.3. The Hon’ble Court may be kind enough to pass appropriate order/orders, direction/directions to respondent Bank to release the payment of his retiral dues including gratuity, leave encashment, full pension, bank fund pension, SBI Life Insurance and General Insurance etc. 10.4. The Hon’ble Court may be kind enough to pass any other order or direction as deems fit in the circumstances of the case may also be awarded in favour of the petitioner. 2. The present petition assails the order of punishment dated 19.03.2025 passed by the disciplinary authority under the State Gramin Bank Officers and Employees Service Regulations, 2013. The said Regulations specifically provides for a statutory remedy of appeal against such order under Clause 49, 50 and 51 of the Regulations 2013. 3. In view of the aforementioned facts and considering that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy of appeal under the applicable Regulations 2013, I am not inclined to entertain the present petition. No exceptional circumstances have been demonstrated so as to justify bypassing the statutory remedy of appeal. 4. Accordingly the writ petition stands dismissed reserving the liberty with the petitioner to avail the other remedy of appeal available under the Regulations 2013. 3 5. However, considering the fact that the order of punishment (Annexure P/1) dated 19.03.2025 has been challenged within a period of one month, it is directed that in the event the petitioner prefers an appeal before the competent appellate authority within a period of 45 fays from today, the concerned appellate authority shall consider and decide the appeal on its own merits, expeditiously, in accordance with law and the prescribed Regulations, 2013. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge