NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 760 of 2023

1 - A.C. Hatile S/o Late Shri Kishan Lal Hatile, Aged About 62 Years Assistant Grade Ii (Retired) R/o 26/49 Laxmi Niwas, Friends Colony, Digitally Mova, District Raipur , Chhattisgarh. Pin 494001 signed by SHAYNA KADRI ... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe Development Department, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur Distric Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2 - The Commissioner, Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe Development Department, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3 - The Commissioner, Department Enquiry, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4 - The Collector, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.

5 - The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.

... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner : Ms. Anuja Sharma For State : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Government Advocate (Hon'ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge)

Order on Board

11/12/2025

1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs :

“10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for all the records of this case.

10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ, order, or direction quashing the departmental inquiry initiated against the petitioner on the grounds of extraordinary delay and initiated by the inquiry officer who was not authorised to initiate and proceed further with the departmental inquiry in the eyes of law.

10.3 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ, order, or directionto the respondent authorities to grant the petitioner all the retiral dues including gratuity, arrears, benefit of 3rd pay scale and other consequential benefits.

10.4 Any other relief which the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances may also be provided to the petitioners.”

2. Facts of the case, a projected in the petition, are that the petitioner, who was serving as Assistant Grade-II in the office of the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development, Mahasamund, retired on 31.10.2022, but long before his superannuation, he was issued a charge-sheet on 11.06.2018 alleging violation of Rule 21 of the Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1965 for selecting private agencies without following due procedure during 2010–11, despite a parallel departmental enquiry having been initiated against the then Assistant Commissioner on identical allegations. Although the petitioner submitted an interim reply on 04.07.2018 and repeatedly requested supply of 28 listed documents to enable him to file a final defence, the authorities never provided the documents, thereby violating Rule 14(4) of the CCA Rules, 1966.

Despite the absence of a written statement of defence, an Inquiry Officer was appointed on 12.12.2019 after an unexplained delay of 18 months, and although the petitioner was a Class III district- level employee whose disciplinary authority should have been a district-level officer, the charge-sheet was issued by the State- level authority, and contrary to Rule 18(1), separate charge-sheets were issued instead of a joint charge-sheet with the co-delinquent Assistant Commissioner. While the enquiry against the Assistant Commissioner concluded, the petitioner’s enquiry did not proceed, and he was later orally informed that the Commissioner could not continue his case as the petitioner was a Class III employee, following which he submitted several representations requesting closure of proceedings, all of which remained unanswered. Despite his retirement, he received a notice dated 09.11.2022 directing appearance in the enquiry, where he again objected to the jurisdiction of the Commissioner under the 1984 GAD circular and highlighted persistent illegality, including non-supply of documents, improper disciplinary authority, and violation of mandatory procedure. Even after further representations dated 21