##PAGE1##

CGHC010210112019 2026:CGHC:38458 AFR Digitally signed by SISTA SISTA SOMAYAJULU HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SOMAYAJULU Date:

2026.09.02

15:11:01 WPS No. 5000 of 2019 +0530 Surendra Singh Kachhawah, S/o Shri Surat Singh, aged about 53 years, R/o Qtr. No. 2, Police Wireless Colony, Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh.

... Petitioner versus

1. Additional Director General of Police (Administration), Police Head Quarter, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Inspector General of Police (Tele Communication), Police Head Qurtrer, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Shri Rakesh Tiwari, Inspector (Radio-T/C), Police Wireless Colony, Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh.

... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Bhuvneshwar Singh Rajput, Advocate.

For Respondents No.1 & 2 : Mr. Sharad Mishra, Panel Lawyer.

Single Bench:-

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal

Order On Board

31/08/2026

1. Invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article

226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has called in question legality, validity and correctness of order dated 23-1-2004 (Annexure P-19) passed by respondent No.1, by which a penalty of removal from service has been imposed upon him, which has been affirmed by the appellate authority – respondent No.1 by order dated 28-12-2018 (Annexure P-27).

2. The aforesaid challenge has been made on the following factual backdrop: -

Facts necessary for disposal of this Writ Petition

3. The petitioner was subjected to regular disciplinary proceeding on the charge that during the lifetime of his first wife Smt. Neelam Singh, without obtaining prior permission from the Department, he entered into second marriage with one Sunita Singh and thereby violated Rule 22(1) of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1965 (for short, ‘the Conduct Rules of 1965’). After regular departmental enquiry, the disciplinary authority imposed a penalty of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect upon the petitioner which was enhanced in appeal by the Additional Director General of Police (Administration) by order dated 23-1-2004 by imposing penalty of dismissal from service which he challenged before this Court in WP No.2075/2004 which this Court set aside and directed the appellate authority to hear and disposal of the appeal in accordance with law. Ultimately, again, by the impugned order dated 28-12-2018, the appeal was dismissed leading to filing of this writ petition.

4. Mr. Bhuvneshwar Singh Rajput, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, would submit that since the petitioner is Constable (Radio/Telecommunication) in the Department of Police, Wireless (Telecommunication), the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 (for short, ‘the Rules of 1966’) would be applicable and by virtue of Rule 14(5)(c) of the said Rules, in absence of the first Presenting Officer, the Enquiry Officer has acted as the prosecutor, therefore, it is violation of the principles of natural justice and thus the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

5. Mr. Sharad Mishra, learned State counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2/State, would submit that looking to the fact that the petitioner has entered into second marriage with Sunita Singh during the lifetime of his first wife Neelam Singh and both the wives have been examined as prosecution witnesses and they have supported the case of the Department, the petitioner has rightly been dismissed from service which calls for no interference in exercise of the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and, therefore, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also gone through the material available on record with utmost circumspection.

7. The first question for consideration would be, whether the Rules of

1966 govern departmental/disciplinary proceedings against the petitione