1 2026:CGHC:3469 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 585 of 2026 1 - Neeraj Bandhe S/o Shri Narendra Bandhe Aged About 35 Years R/o Tulsipur, Ward No. 16, House No. 408, Bajrang Chowk, Rajnandgaon, P.S.- City Kotwali, Tahsil And District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Police Station And Post- Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Chief Medical And Health Officer (Cmho) O/o. Cmho, Fauwara Chowk, Old District Hospital Building, Ground Floor, Balod, Distt. Balod (C.G.) 3 - Block Medical Officer (Bmo) Community Health Center, Gurur, Distt. Balod (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Pandey, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiya, Government Advocate SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 20/0 1/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records relating to the case of present petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside/quash the impugned charge-sheet dated 2 15.12.2025 issued by the Respondent No. 2 CMHO, Balod against the petitioner (Annexure P/1). 10.3 That, the Hon’ble High Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 2 & 3 to release the full salary to the petitioner for his absent period. 10.4 That, this Hon’ble Court may further be pleased to direct the respondents to give suitable compensation to the petitioner for the mental trauma and agony, harassment and hardships suffered by them as also, cost of the litigation.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working as Rural Health Organizer (Male) and is posted at Community Health Centre, Gurur, District – Balod. Petitioner was served with a letter with the subject as charge-memo dated 15.12.2025 (Annexure P/1), however, in the said document, the charge leveled against the petitioner is vague and not specific. He also contended that along with the charge-memo (Annexure P/1), list of documents to be relied upon as also, the list of witness examined to prove the charges is not enclosed and has not been given. Therefore, the charge-sheet in its form as given to the petitioner is not in proper format as prescribed under the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1966 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as the Rules, 1966) . 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondents/State opposes the submission of counsel for the petitioner and would submit that he has sought instructions from the authority and submits that the document dated 15.12.2025 (Annexure P/1) is only issued to the petitioner as charge-memo. He further submits that list of documents and list of witnesses is handed-over to the Enquiry Officer on the same date i.e. 15.12.2025. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the document (Annexure P/1) placed on record which is said to be charge-memo issued to the petitioner. 3 5. The charge leveled against the petitioner is not specific and further, charge-memo does not mention the list of documents or the list of witnesses enclosed along with the charge-memo for proving the charges leveled against the petitioner as mentioned in letter dated 15.12.2025 (Annexure P/1). In the aforementioned facts of the case, the cahrge-sheet which is issued to the petitioner prima facie appears to be vague under the Rules, 1966. 6. Section 14 of the Rules, 1966 provides for the procedure for imposing penalties. Sub-section 3 of Section 14 of the Rules, 1966 provides that where it is proposed to hold an enquiry against the government servant under this Rule and Rule 15, the disciplinary authority shall draw-up or caused to be drawn-up: (i) Substances of the imputation of the misconduct or misbehavior to defend and distinguish articles of charge, but also mentions that statement of charge shall contain statement of relevant facts in an admission or confession made by the government servant and list of documents and the list of witnesses by whom, the articles of charge are proposed to be substantiated. 7. 7. In the case at hand, their proposal i.e. letter dated 15.12.2025 (Annexure P/1) does not reflect that the respondent authorities have issued list of documents or the list of witnesses to the petitioner and therefore, the charge-memo issued to the petitioner by the respondent department is not inconformity with the Rule 14 of the Rules, 1966 and therefore, the charge-memo issued to the petitioner vide letter dated 15.12.2025 (Annexure P/1) in its form is not in accordance with the Rules, 1966 and therefore, it is not sustainable. Accordingly, the charge-memo issued to the petitioner dated 15.12.2025 (Annexure P/1) is hereby quashed. However, the respondents will be at liberty to issue a fresh charge-memo following the due procedure as provided under Rule 14 of the Rules, 1966. 4 8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands allowed in above terms. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY Date: 2026.01.22 14:47:10 +0530