Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 14846
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Pawan Kumar Jha, J
HAJARILAL KURRE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
WPS No. 3467 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Vinod Deshmukh
For the Respondents: Aditya Tiwari, Akanksha Jain
The court granted an interim stay on the removal of an in-charge Principal, pending a determination of whether the removal was arbitrary or justified by the petitioner's alleged failure to operate financial accounts.
Headnote:(A) Administrative Law - Removal from Post - Arbitrariness - Challenge to the removal of an in-charge Principal on grounds of arbitrariness and alleged motive to accommodate another individual. (Para 6)
(B) Interim Relief - Stay of Order - Prima Facie Case - Grant of interim stay on the operation of a removal order pending adjudication of the dispute regarding the liability for lapsing of allocated funds. (Para 8)
Issues: Whether the removal of the petitioner from the post of in-charge Principal was arbitrary and whether interim relief should be granted.
Order on Board
PAWAN
KUMAR
JHA
Digitaly signed by
PAWAN KUMAR
J DH aA te: 2026.04.29
17:43:17 +0530
Heard.
Issue notice to respondents.
Ld. counsel for the respective respondents accept notice on behalf of respective respondents, hence, PF is not required to be paid for these respondents.
On payment of process fee, issue notice to Resp. No. 6. PF be paid as per rules. Notice be made returnable within three weeks.
Also heard on I.A. No. 01/2026, application of grant of interim relief.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has been arbitrarily removed from the post of in-charge Principal only to accommodate the private respondent. He submits that the reasons assigned in the order is not correct, petitioner was not permitted to operate the account as in-charge Principal but according to him two other persons namely Suryakant Upadhyay and Bhupendra Ghritlahre were operating the concerned account under the order passed by the superior authority. He submits that petitioner was directed to operate the account along with other vide letter dated 17.02.2026 and therefore petitioner cannot be held liable for lapsing of the funds allocated for the financial year 2025-26 as the financial year came to an end within 01 month and 10 days from the date of permitting the petitioner to operate the account on 31.03.2026.
Ld. counsel for the respective respondents though oppose the submission of learned counsel for petitioner and would submit that petitioner has not signed the documents forwarded for withdrawal of account to be used within the cluster. They submit that that they will file reply to the application for interim relief also.
On due consideration of the submission of learned counsel for the parties, purely as an interim measure, it is directed that the effect and operation of impugned letter Annexure P-1 dated 09.04.2026, shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing.
List this case in week commencing from 15.06.2026.
Certified copy as per rules.
