Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh v. 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Though The Secretary, Department Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:36611 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 481 of 2023 1 - Teekam Dewangan S/o Shri Bhuneshwar Dewangan, Aged About 30 Years R/o Dongaripara, Ward No. 04, Kondagaon, District : Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Though The Secretary, Department Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Commissioner, Baster Division, District Bastar Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Chief Engineer, Rural Engineering Service, Office Of Development Commissioner, Vikas Bhawan, Sector 19, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 5 - The Superindenting Engineer, Rural Engineering Service, Baster Mandal, Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh. 6 - The Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering Service Division, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Govind Prasad Dewangan, Advocate For State : Mr. Ankur Kashyap, Dy. Government Advocate SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad 28/07/2025 Order on Board 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the respondent authorities, Digitally signed by SHAYNA KADRI whereby, without issuing any show cause notice or affording an opportunity of hearing, he was reverted from the post of Assistant Grade-III to Peon by order dated 19.12.2022 issued by respondent No. 4 (Chief Engineer), cancelling his promotion order dated 20.07.2021 on the ground of non-availability of posts. It is relevant to note that the 2 petitioner had been discharging duties on the promoted post for over
Legal Reasoning
one year and five months. The impugned action is ex facie violative of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the settled legal position. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs : “10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an appropriate order or issue writ and quash/set-aside the impugned order dated 19.12.2022 (Annexure P/1), in the interest of justice. 10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an appropriate order or issue writ and direct the respondent authorities to post the petitioner in post of Assistant Grade-III as per promotion order dated 20.07.2021 (Annexure P/4), in the interest of justice. 10.3 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an appropriate order or issue writ and direct the respondent authorities to decide the representation dated 19.12.2022 (Annexure P/6) of the petitioner within stipulated, in the interest of justice. 10.4 This Hon'ble Court may further be pleased to pass an appropriate order or issue writ as deemed fit under the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that on 03.03.2015, the petitioner was appointed to the post of Peon in the office of the Rural Engineering Service Division, Kondagaon, in the State of Chhattisgarh. This initial appointment marked the beginning of the formal employment of petitioner with the respondent authorities, and the petitioner diligently performed the duties and responsibilities assigned to him in that 3 capacity. Subsequently, on 25.04.2020, the Chief Engineer, who is respondent no. 4 in the present matter, issued an official order certifying that the petitioner had successfully completed his probation period. As a result, the petitioner was regularized in his service, a fact which was documented and formalized through the order dated 25.04.2020. This order solidified the status of petitioner as a regular employee, thus entitling him to all attendant rights and privileges flowing from such confirmation. Further affirming the standing of petitioner within the department, the respondent authorities issued a seniority list on 11.09.2020, specifically for the cadre of Peons, in which the name of petitioner appeared at serial number 33. This seniority list serves as an important official document recognizing the position and tenure of petitioner in the said cadre. On the basis of his service record and as per the decision of the Departmental Promotion Committee dated 11.06.2021, the petitioner was promoted from the post of Peon to Assistant Grade-III in the same office of the Rural Engineering Service Division, Kondagaon. The promotion order was officially issued on 20.07.2021. In accordance with this promotion order, the petitioner duly joined the new post and also formally intimated respondent no. 6, the Executive Engineer, regarding his assumption of duties through a letter dated 20.07.2021. Since the date of joining as Assistant Grade-III, the petitioner has been conscientiously performing his duties with utmost sincerity, dedication, and honesty. There has been no allegation or indication of misconduct or inefficiency in his service during this period, which has extended for over one year and five months. Unexpectedly and without any prior notice, show cause, or opportunity of hearing, the Chief Engineer (respondent no. 4) issued an order dated 19.12.2022, 4 whereby the promotion of petitioner was abruptly cancelled, and he was reverted to the post of Peon. The stated ground for such reversion was that the posts in the Assistant Grade-III cadre were allegedly unavailable, which, it was contended, justified rescinding the promotion. This action was taken unilaterally, without any procedural fairness or adherence to principles of natural justice. It is noteworthy that the petitioner had been continuously working in the promoted capacity for a substantial period, rendering dedicated service, and had relied on the promotion order to discharge the duties of the higher post. The abrupt cancellation, without prior consultation or hearing, constitutes a serious violation of the petitioner’s rights and has caused him undue hardship and prejudice. In response to this unjustified and arbitrary action, the petitioner promptly submitted a representation on the very same day, 19.12.2022, to the respondent authorities. In the representation, the petitioner requested the authorities to reinstate him in the post of Assistant Grade-III, emphasizing that he had already assumed charge and had been performing all responsibilities associated with the promoted post for more than one and a half years. The petitioner sought that his rights be protected, and the impugned order be reconsidered, taking into account the long and uninterrupted service rendered by him at the higher post and the absence of any misconduct or inefficiency on his part. The representation of petitioner also highlighted the procedural irregularities in the issuance of the impugned order and appealed for a fair and just resolution in line with the applicable rules, principles of natural justice, and the constitutional protections available to him. Thus, the facts clearly demonstrate that the petitioner, having fulfilled all criteria and duly promoted, was 5 unfairly and illegally reverted to his earlier position without due process, thereby causing significant prejudice to his career and fundamental rights as an employee and citizen. The continued representation made by petitioner underscores his earnest desire for justice and reinstatement to the post legitimately held by him, and sets the stage for a detailed examination of the legality and propriety of the actions of the respondent authorities. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the action of the respondent authorities in reverting the petitioner from the post of Assistant Grade-III to the post of Peon by cancelling the promotion order dated 20.07.2021 is wholly arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to settled principles of law. The impugned order dated 19.12.2022 passed by the respondent no. 4 without affording any prior opportunity of hearing or issuing any show cause notice to the petitioner is in clear violation of the fundamental principles of natural justice and is, therefore, liable to be quashed. It is well settled by authoritative judicial pronouncements that once an employee has been promoted to a higher post, such promotion, if duly granted and accepted, cannot be rescinded or the employee reverted to the lower post except by following due process of law and only for valid and cogent reasons. The law does not permit arbitrary reversion merely on the ground of non-availability of posts, especially when the employee has been discharging the duties of the higher post for a considerable period with full dedication, honesty, and sincerity. In the instant case, the petitioner has been working continuously as Assistant Grade-III since 20.07.2021, i.e., for more than one and a half years, without any allegation of misconduct or inefficiency. The impugned action of 6 cancellation of the promotion of petitioner without prior notice or hearing is impermissible in law. This Court in the matter of Prem Narayan Sengar vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors, passed in W.P.S. No. 6423of 2010 has emphatically held that reversion of a promoted employee without giving an opportunity of hearing is illegal and violative of natural justice. The Court in the aforesaid case set aside the impugned order of reversion and directed the respondents to grant an opportunity of hearing before passing any fresh order. Further, the Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh in the matter of Dhanwantri Upadhayae vs. State of H.P. & Ors, while relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Union of India and others v. K.V. Jankiraman and others, reported in (1991) 4 SCC 109, has reinforced the principle that a promoted employee cannot be reverted arbitrarily except in accordance with due process of law. The Court observed that the issuance of a charge memo or initiation of disciplinary/criminal proceedings is a prerequisite for any adverse action such as reversion, and mere preliminary investigation or administrative reasons cannot justify such action. This well-established legal position clearly supports the case of petitioner that his reversion without following due process is illegal and unsustainable. It is also submitted that the petitioner has been discharging the functions of the post of Assistant Grade-III with utmost dedication, honesty, and sincerity since the date of his promotion and has earned the rights and benefits attached to the said post. The arbitrary cancellation of the promotion order by the respondent authorities without recording any reasons and without adhering to principles of natural justice violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. As observed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the 7 matter of B.A. Linga Reddy v. Karnataka State Transport Authority, passed in (2015) 4 SCC 515, any decision made by a statutory or public authority which is arbitrary, unfair, and without recording reasons is violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the
Decision
Constitution. In view of the above submissions, it is prayed that this Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 19.12.2022 and restore the petitioner to the post of Assistant Grade-III with all consequential benefits. The petitioner also prays that the respondent authorities be directed to pass a fresh order after affording the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of hearing in accordance with law. 4. Learned State counsel submits that the impugned order dated 19.12.2022 cancelling the promotion of the petitioner from Peon to Assistant Grade-III is legal, justified, and passed in accordance with the relevant service rules and administrative requirements. It is submitted that the cancellation was necessitated due to the non- availability of any vacant post in the cadre of Assistant Grade-III at the time of cancellation. The promotion, though initially granted on 20.07.2021, was issued based on an incorrect assumption of the availability of a vacancy in the said cadre. Upon a thorough review of the sanctioned strength and existing vacancies, it was found that no post was actually vacant to accommodate the promotion of petitioner, thereby compelling the department to rescind the promotion to maintain the integrity of the sanctioned cadre structure. Learned State counsel further submits that such administrative action to rectify an erroneous promotion order does not violate principles of natural justice, as the promotion itself was conditional on the existence of a vacancy, 8 and the cancellation was an exercise of the legitimate administrative powers of department. It is well settled in law, including in judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, that promotion without availability of sanctioned posts is not sustainable and can be lawfully withdrawn. Moreover, the claim of petitioner of denial of opportunity of hearing is not tenable since the cancellation relates to cadre management and vacancy status, which is a matter of administrative discretion. In light of the above, the impugned order deserves to be upheld as it was passed bona fide and in public interest to ensure compliance with the sanctioned cadre strength, and the writ petition filed by the petitioner is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents annexed along with the petition. 6. It is well established that principles of natural justice require that before passing any adverse order affecting service status or rights of an employee, the concerned employee must be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The respondents’ failure to provide any opportunity of hearing or show cause notice to the petitioner before cancelling the promotion order is a violation of the principles of natural justice and is illegal. Although the respondents contend that the cancellation was necessitated due to non-availability of a post, such administrative action cannot be taken without following due process and without affording the affected employee a chance to present his case. 7. In the present case, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant Grade-III by an official order dated 20.07.2021, on which date the petitioner joined and assumed the duties of the promoted post. 9 Subsequently, the respondents issued an order dated 19.12.2022 cancelling the promotion of petitioner and reverting him to the post of Peon. This cancellation was effected without issuing any prior notice, show-cause notice, or affording the petitioner any opportunity to be heard. Such unilateral action, without following the principles of natural justice, is manifestly illegal and arbitrary. It is well settled in law that once a promotion order is issued and accepted by the employee, the rights accrued cannot be taken away except by following due process and for valid and cogent reasons. The denial of opportunity to the petitioner to present his case or explain the circumstances before passing such adverse order constitutes a serious violation of the principles of natural justice and also infringes on the fundamental rights of petitioner under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. 8. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 19.12.2022 cancelling the promotion of the petitioner is quashed and set aside. However, the respondents are at liberty to pass an appropriate fresh order after affording the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of hearing in accordance with law and after following the due procedure. 9. The writ petition is therefore allowed to the extent indicated. No order as to costs. Shayna Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) JUDGE