2026:CGHC:8348 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5370 of 2025

1 - Mohan Lal Lahri S/o. Ramphal Lahri Aged About 57 Years Occupation - Assistant Teacher (Lb) At Government Primary School, Dhamni, Block - Pathariya, R/o. Sargaon, Police Station And Tahsil - Sargaon, District -

Mungeli (C.G.) Mo. No. 9977229914.

2 - Raju Ram Nishad S/o. Shri Lalaram Nishad Aged About 38 Years Occupation - Head Master At Government Primary School, Talapara, Block - Pathariya, R/o. Sargaon, Police Station And Tahsil - Sargaon, District -

Mungeli (C.G.)

3 - Devkumar Pradhan S/o. Shri Santan Das Pradhan Aged About 35 Years Occupation - Teacher (Lb) At Government Primary School, Kanharkapa, Block - Pathariya, R/o. Sargaon, Police Station And Tahsil - Sargaon, District -

Mungeli (C.G.)

... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Police Station -

Rakhi, Tahsil And District - Raipur (C.G.)

2 - Director Public Instruction, Directorate, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)

3 - Managing Director State Project Officer, 2nd Floor, Cgbse Building, Pension Bada, Tagore Nagar, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)

Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date:

2026.02.19 +0530

4 - Collector Cum Ex-Officio District Mission Director Samagra Siksha, District - Mungeli (C.G.)

5 - District Education Officer Pathariya, District - Mungeli (C.G.)

... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner : Mr. Ratnesh Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For State : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, Panel Lawyer S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

Order on Board

16/02/2026

1. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, this case is heard finally.

2. Petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:-

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for entire records of the case, from the authorities.

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be please to quash the order dated 24.03.2025 passed by the respondent no. (Annexure-P/1) is in the interest of justice.

10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be please to remove the recommendation made by the enquiry team in the respect of the petitioners in the enquiry report, is in the interest of justice.

10.4 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners No.1 to 3 while holding post of Assistant Teacher (LB), Headmaster and Teacher (LB) respectively were issued show cause notice as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against them. Petitioners submitted reply to show cause notice and thereafter respondent authorities without framing any charge and following due process of law of conducting departmental enquiry against petitioners have passed the order of punishment of withholding of one increment with non-cumulative effect. Order passed by respondent authority is without following due procedure prescribed under Rule 14 of the MP/CG Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal ) Rules, 1966 (for short “Rules of 1966”) . He contended that order of punishment is passed without following principles of natural justice and therefore it is bad in law. Effect of penalty is for indefinite period, it is having long-lasting effect till the petitioners retire from service and therefore before imposing such punishment, procedure as provided under Rule 14 of the Rules of 1966 has to be followed. In support of his contention, he places reliance upon decision of this Court in case of Rajesh Bhagat Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. (WPS No.588 of 2016, decided on 04.1.2022) as also decision of High Court of Madhya Pradesh in case of State of M.P. Ors. Vs. N.S. Chouhan (Writ Appeal No.33 of 2013, decided on 17.09.2014).

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes submission of learned counsel for the petitioners and