SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 11285

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MEGHNATH PATEL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
WPC/2881/2021



2026:CGHC:17402 NAFR AVINASH SHARMA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA WPC No. 2881 of 2021 Date: 2026.04.21 11:34:19 +0530

1 - Meghnath Patel S/o Gadarai Patel, Aged About 46 Years Sarpanch Village Panchayat Medhapali, R/o Village Medhapali, Tahsil Basna, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

2 - Sukhsagar Manikpuri S/o Resham Das, Aged About 39 Years Up - Sarpanch, Village Panchayat Medhapali, R/o Village Medhapali, Tahsil Basna, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh., 3 - Dayalal Patel S/o Chain Singh, Aged About 40 Years Panch, Village Panchayat Medhapali, R/o Village Medhapali, Tahsil Basna, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralaya, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Commissioner, Raipur Division, Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Basna, Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 4 - Sub - Divisional Officer (Revenue) Saraipali District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 5 - Purushottam Patel S/o Mohanlal Patel, Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Harilachapadar, Village Panchayat Medhapali, Tahsil Basna District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Shri Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate.

For State/Res : Ms. Vartika Shrivastava, PL.

For Respondent No.5 : Shri Sudhanshu Upadhyay appears on behalf of Shri Sharad Mishra, Advocates.

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Order on Board

16/04/2026

1. The Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for the following reliefs:-

i. To kindly call for the records of the case from the respondents.

ii. To kindly quash the Order vide no. 949/MGNREGA/F-5/J.P./2020-21 Basna dated 12/11/2020 issued by the respondent Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat imposing penalty of Rs. 1000.00 upon the petitioner no.1 under Section 25 of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (in short MNREGA). (ANNEXURE P/1)

iii. To kindly quash the order vide no. 3393/S.A.Misc/2020 Raipur dated 17/11/2020 passed by the Commissioner, Raipur Division Raipur directing the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Basna to recover 12750:00 as well as directing the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) to proceed under the provisions of CG Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (ANNEXURE P/2).

iv. To kindly quash the proceedings under Section 40 of the CG Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam,1993 vide Revenue Case no. 73/A/89 year 2020-21 pending before the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Saraipali District Mahasamund (C.G.)

(ANNEXURE P/3).

2. Facts of the case succinctly stated are that the petitioners are office bearers of the Village Panchayat Medhapali, District Mahasamund (C.G.). Under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Act (for short “MGNREGA”), the Village Panchayat is the implementing authority. To ensure the employment to the households, job cards are issued containing the names of all eligible adult members. Any adult member whose name is there in the job card can seek work under the Scheme. During the COVID-19 pandemic period due to quarantine restrictions, family members of the job card holders worked and received money for the work done by them and the job card holder also. Without ascertaining the factual aspect, the respondent No.5 Purushottam Patel in the month of July 2020 made a complaint to the Janpad Panchayat alleging inter alia that the petitioners have entered names of quarantine labours in the muster roll and have misappropriated the government money. Thereafter, the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Basna without complying with the provisions of the MNREGA arbitrarily appointed enquiry officer contrary to the provisions of the Grievance redressal mechanism i.e. Instruction on Ombudsman (ANNEXURE P/5) statutorily prescribed under the MNREGA. The enquiry officer without following the due procedure p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top