2026:CGHC:5889 Digitally AFR signed by SISTA SISTA SOMAYAJULU SOMAYAJULU Date: HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

2026.02.03

17:57:19 +0530 WPS No. 2609 of 2019 Satish Kumar Tiwari, age 72 years, S/o Late Shri Shankar Lal Tiwari, presently R/o 152 Utopia Layout, Old Bangalore Resort, Tharabana, Halli, Chikkajala, Bangluru, Karnataka.

... Petitioner versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh, through its Secretary, Department of Water Resource, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Engineer-in-Chief, Department of Water Resources, Government of Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Chief Engineer, Water Resource Department, Mahanadi-Godawari Basin, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

4. Commissioner, Departmental Enquiry Chhattisgarh, Office of Chhattisgarh Departmental Enquiry Commissioner, DKS Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

5. State of Madhya Pradesh, through Department of Water Resource and Narmada Basin Development Department, Mantralaya, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.

... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Sharad Mishra, Advocate.

For Respondents No.1 to 4 : Mr. Vivek Mishra, Panel Lawyer.

For Respondent No.5 : Mr. Manish Nigam, Advocate.

Single Bench:-

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal

Order on Board

02/02/2026

1. The petitioner herein, who stood retired from service as Executive Engineer in the Water Resources Department of the State of Chhattisgarh, seeks to challenge legality, validity and correctness of the impugned order dated 24-9-2018 (Annexure P-1) by which the State Government has appointed Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer under Rule 14 of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 for conducting departmental enquiry against him after his retirement.

2. The aforesaid challenge has been made on the following factual backdrop: -

3. The petitioner attained the age of superannuation and he retired as Executive Engineer on 31-3-2007 vide Annexure P-3. The State Government after leave from the competent authority under Rule 9(2)(b)(i) of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 (for short, ‘the Pension Rules’) instituted departmental enquiry against the petitioner by issuing charge-sheet to him and two other employees namely, Mr. Mukesh Santoshi & Mr. P.K. Patel, on 31-8- 2007, however, charges against Mr. Mukesh Santoshi & Mr. P.K. Patel were dropped by order dated 22-5-2008. In response to the charge-sheet, the petitioner submitted detailed reply on 3-3-2009 vide Annexure P-5 stating that the works were executed in accordance with the PWD Manual, without any financial irregularity or misappropriation of public funds and after receipt of reply, no further departmental proceeding was taken up from 2009 to 2018 and till the impugned order was issued, whereby Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer were appointed under Rule 14 of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966, which is sought to be challenged by the petitioner on the ground that there is inordinate delay in conducting departmental enquiry and after the departmental proceeding was instituted on 31-8-2007, the order appointing Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer was issued on 24- 9-2018 i.e. with a delay of 11 years and meanwhile, 10% of the total pension amount has also been deducted from the petitioner by order dated 16-1-2017 (Annexure P-2), which is in violation of the Rules and therefore the order impugned be quashed.

4. Return has been filed on behalf of the State of Chhattisgarh/

respondents No.1 to 4 stating inter alia that departmental enquiry has been conducted in accordance with the Pension Rules and the petitioner has been charge-sheeted, however, in the meanwhile, departmental proceeding could not proceed, however, by the impugned order dated 24-9-2018, Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer have been appointed and thereafter the matter could not proceed further.

5. Mr. Sharad Mishra, learned counsel