Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 23594
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J
KISHORE KUMAR VAISHNAV – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
WPS No. 747 of 2020
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Vinod Kumar Sharma
For the Respondents:
An order of removal from service passed without a hearing or inquiry is illegal, and an appeal against such order cannot be dismissed for delay if the original order was never communicated to the employee.
Headnote:(A) Administrative Law - Removal from Service - Principles of Natural Justice - Removal of an employee from service without conducting an inquiry and without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing is unsustainable and bad in law. (Para 5)
(B) Limitation - Condonation of Delay - Communication of Order - Where an order of removal is not communicated to the employee, the delay in filing an appeal is not deliberate, and the appeal cannot be dismissed solely on the ground of limitation. (Para 2, 5)
Issues: Whether the appeal against removal from service could be dismissed on the grounds of limitation when the removal order was not communicated to the petitioner.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of removal from service and the petitioner's claim regarding non-communication of the order. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. violation of natural justice and the justification for condoning delay in filing an appeal. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. final disposal of the writ petition. (Para 6) |
Order on Board
1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 17/09/2019 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Commissioner, Durg Division whereby the appeal preferred by the petition, against his order of removal from service, has been dismissed holding it to be barred by limitation.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of removal from service dated 08/03/2016 was not communicated to the petitioner and as soon as he came to know about the removal order when his friend told him about the same on 20/05/2018, petitioner immediately filed an appeal along with application for condonation of delay.
3. None has appeared to oppose though notice has been issued on 07/02/2020.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
5. A careful perusal of the record would show that the petitioner is a differently abled person and he has straightway removed from service without conducting any inquiry and without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to him. He has clearly stated that the delay occurred in filing of the appeal was not at all deliberate as the order of removal from service was not at all communicated to him and as soon as his friend told him about the same on 20/05/2018, he secured a copy of the order and filed an appeal before the Commissioner. As such, the Commissioner, Durg Division is absolutely unjustified in dismissing the appeal of the petitioner on the ground of delay and the impugned order dated 17/09/2019 (Annexure P/1), being unsustainable and bad in law, is hereby set aside. Matter is remitted to the Commissioner, Durg Division to hear the parties and decide petitioner’s appeal on merits, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, absolutely in accordance with law.
6. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. No cost(s).
