2026:CGHC:11219 NAFR Digitally signed by AVINASH A SH VI A N R A M S A HS D H at A e R : MA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

2026.03.14 10:11:14 +0530 WPS No. 5968 of 2023 Navin Pashine S/o. Shri Krishna Kumar Pashine, Aged About 33 Years R/o. House No. 500. Street No. 3 Ward No. 21 Sindhiya Nagar Durg, District - Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner.

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Higher Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Principal, Government Vishvanath Yadav Tamaskar Autonomous College Durg, District - Durg, Chhattisgarh.

3 - Convener, Enquiry Team, Government Vishvanath Yadav Tamaskar Autonomous College Durg, District - Durg, Chhattisgarh.

... Respondents.

For Petitioner : Shri Mo. Naqeeb, Advocate.

For State/Respondents : Shri Ujjawal Choubey, PL.

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Order on Board

09/03/2026

1. Challenge in this Writ Petition has been made to the order dated

02.08.2023 (Annexure P/1) passed by Respondent No.2, whereby petitioner has been terminated from his services as his work was not found satisfactory.

2. Following reliefs have been sought by the petitioner:-

1. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondent the respondents to quash the impugned order dated

02/08/2023.

2. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondent authority to reinstate the petitioner into the services.

3. Any other relief as deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court.

3. Necessary facts of the case are that the petitioner is working as Data Entry Operator in Govt. V.Y. T. Auto College Durg (C.G.). He was appointed as Full Time Data Entry Operator in the year 2011 dated 05.12.2011 by the order of Principal Govt. V.Y. T. Auto College Durg (C.G.). That, in the Year 2020 the salary of the petitioner was reduced without any reason by the respondent authorities, the petitioner has moved several representation before the authorities for restoring his previous salary but Respondent Authorities care not to act on the representation. Thereafter, on 23/01/2023 the petitioner moved the High Court against this inaction by preferring a writ petition which was registered as W.P. (S) No. 819/2023 which was disposed off with the direction to the respondent authorities to take decision upon the grievances of the petitioner. That, On 20/04/2023 the Petitioner was served with the show cause notice making baseless allegation about tampering with the attendance register. Petitioner has rebutted the show cause notice made to him. On 12-05-2023 The Principal rejecting the reply of the Petitioner issued a warning letter to him to not repeat the same in future. That on 14/06/2023 the petitioner has filed the contempt petition against the Respondent No. 02 for non compliance of the court order. That On 10/07/2023 the Respondent No.02 again started inquiry upon the same issue which has already been decided by him though the order formed the inquiry team to enquire about the same allegation in which has already been decided by the Respondent No. 02 (principal) in earlier occasion this amounts to de novo enquiry which is impermissible in service jurisprudence. The language of the impugned show cause notice suggest that respondent authorities are carrying on investigation with pre determined mind wherein the guilt of the employee is already ascertained. The inquiry team has conducted the enquiry in extremely biased manner wherein the guilt of the petitioner was already determined. The Petitioner has approached the inquiry team and requested in writing to give documents and detailed charge sheet on the basis of which the enquiry team is conducting enquiry so that the petitioner can give his detailed reply in writing. The Request of the petitioner has been denied by the enquiry team. That, On 25/07/2023 the petitioner again approached the inquiry team to provide the details of the show cause notice as the show cause notice is unclear and does not mentions about the specificat