NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Appeal No.43 of 2024 Madan Lal Dhruw son of late Shri Bahor Singh Dhruw, aged about 54 years, resident of Khallari Chowk, Bass Tall, Raipura, Police Station-D.D. Nagar, Tehsil & District-Raipur (CG)

---- Appellant Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Excise Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya Police Station And Post Rakhi Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Commissioner, Office Of Commissioner ,Department Of Excise GST Office, Police Station And Post Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Deputy Commissioner (Excise), Office Of Deputy Commissioner Department Of Excise Collectorate Office Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents Cause-title taken from Case Information System For Appellant : Mr.Kamlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For Respondents : Mr.Sangharash Pandey, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

02.02 .2024

1. Heard Mr.Kamlesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr.Sangharash Pandey, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents/State on I.A.No.01/2024, which is an application for condonation of delay of 80 days in preferring the appeal.

2. For the reasons mentioned in the application (I.A.No.01/2024), same is allowed. Delay is condoned.

3. Also heard the writ appeal on admission.

4. The appellant has filed this writ appeal against the order dated

29.08.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No.2938 of 2022, by which the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant herein / writ petitioner.

5. Brief facts necessary for disposal of this writ appeal are that on

22.01.2018 an FIR was registered against the writ petitioner for the ofence punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 120(B)/34 of the IPC before Police Station Khallari, Distt. Mahasamund. The police after conducting the investigation has submitted final report before the Chief Judicial Magistrate which on committal has been registered as Sessions Case No. 19 of 2018, a trial was conducted by the First Additional Sessions Judge. Learned First Additional Sessions Judge vide its judgment date 14.06.2021 has convicted the other co-accused, but granted benefit of doubt to the writ petitioner along with other co-accused Virendra Koshale and Manharan Goswami. Since the writ petitioner was acquitted and without giving any show cause notice the jail period has been treated as ‘no work no pay’ and thus there is violation of Fundamental Rules 54 B(3), but after revocation of suspension without affording any opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner, salary of the writ petitioner during suspension period has been denied which is in violation of the Fundamental Rules. Against which, writ petition was filed by the writ petitioner.

6. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner. Hence, this writ appeal.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned order dated 29.08.2023 is bad in law, arbitrary, discriminatory, therefore, the same is liable to be set aside/quashed. He further submits that the learned Single Judge has failed to appreciate that without holding departmental enquiry, the order declaring the absence period as ‘dies-non’ is violative of the provisions contained in Rule 24(2) of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1977, therefore, the order dated 26.11.2021 is not sustainable. The learned Single Judge has failed to appreciate that the order to declare the period of absence from duty of a public servant in violation of Rule 7 of the Conduct Rules, 1965 and further to declare the period of absence as dies non are punitive order and it cannot be passed without proceeding departmentally in view of the procedure laid down under the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Clas