Departmental proceedings against a retired employee initiated without the mandatory prior sanction of the Governor and regarding events that occurred more than four years prior to the institution of such proceedings are legally unsustainable under the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976.

(Cause title is taken from CIS system)

Order On Board

1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following relief (s) :-

10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire records relating to the case of the petitioner.

10.2 That, Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ and quash the impugned order dated 19.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) and chargesheet dated 01.02.2024 (Annexure P-2) issued by Respondent No.1.

10.3 That, Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the operation and effect of the impugned order dated 19.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued by Respondent No.1 till the pendency of the instant petition.

10.4 That, Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to release all the pensionary benefits of petitioner with interest of 12% within a period of 15 days.

10.5 Any other relief which Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and also cost of the petition.”

2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner while working on the post of Assistant Engineer and posted as Incharge Executive Engineer in the office of Public Works Department, Jashpur, District Jashpur stood retired on 31.01.2021. He contended that after about more than three years of retirement, respondents/department has issued a charge-memo to petitioner alleging that petitioner is involved in corruption in construction of road from Charaidand to Damera in the year 2019. Charge-sheet was served on petitioner on 05.03.2024. He contended that when once petitioner stood retired from service without any show cause notice, or initiation of the enquiry proceedings during such period, respondents authorities could not have directly issued the charge memo for initiating the departmental enquiry against petitioner unless and until sanction is obtained from the competent authority. In support of his contention he referred to sub-rule 2 (b) and sub-rule (3) of Rule 9 of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 (In short ‘the Rules, 1976’).

3. Learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for petitioner and would submit that after taking note of involvement of petitioner in corruption, charge-memo has been issued for initiating departmental enquiry. He submits that enquiry will be conducted strictly in accordance with the procedure as provided under the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1966, however, upon putting specific query with regard to sanction, if any, obtained from the competent authority for initiating the departmental enquiry against petitioner (retired employee), he submits that in the pleadings of the reply there is no mention nor any document is placed on record in this regard.

4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents placed on record.

5. It is not in dispute that petitioner while holding the post of Assistant Engineer stood retired from service on 31.01.2021. Charge-memo issued to petitioner is dated 01.02.2024 and stated to be received on 05.03.2024. Perusal of the charge-memo issued to petitioner would show that the Committee constituted by Collector vide letter dated 20.04.2022 has submitted report that while constructing the road, permission granted by the Forest Department on 18.03.2019 was for construction of the road of 3.75 M. wide and many of the places of width of the road was found 12.54 M. and further that the agreement for earthwork was 60377.86 cubic meter, however, payment is made of 196036.66 cubic meter and Enquiry Committee has found earthwork of 116627.36 cubic meter. From the contents of the