1 - Radhe Lal Suryavanshi S/o Shri Pritam Suryavanshi Aged About 46 Years R/o v. 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development
Case Details
1 WPS No. 1392 of 2016 & Ors. 2025:CGHC:16992 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1392 of 2016 1 - Radhe Lal Suryavanshi S/o Shri Pritam Suryavanshi Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Bundela, Tehsil And P.S. Pamgarh, Distt. Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Director, Panchayat And Rural Services Directorate, Chhattisgarh, H.Q. Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Collector, Distt. Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Pamgarh, Distt. Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) 2 WPS No. 1392 of 2016 & Ors. WPS No. 1404 of 2016
Legal Reasoning
1 - Smt. Rajshri W/o Shri Sewa Singh, Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Sasha, Tahsil And P.S. Pamgarh, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya, Mahandi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Director, Panchayat And Social Services Directorate, Chhattisgarh H.Q. Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Collector, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Pamgarh, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 1399 of 2016 1 - Ramashankar S/o Shri Ramlal Aged About 45 Years R/o Village And P.O. Bundela, Tehsil And P.S. Pamgarh, Distt. Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus 3 WPS No. 1392 of 2016 & Ors. 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Director, Panchayat And Social Services Directorate, Chhattisgarh, H.Q. Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Collector, Distt. Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Chief Executive Officer,, Janpad Panchayat, Pamgarh, Distt. Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 1398 of 2016 1 - Kalyan Singh Rajput S/o Shri Bhavan Singh Rajput, Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Sasha, Tahsil And P.S. Pamgarh, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Director, Panchayat And Social Services Directorate, Chhattisgarh H.Q. Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 WPS No. 1392 of 2016 & Ors. 3 - The Collector, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Pamgarh, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Saleem Kazi, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Government No.1 to 3 Advocate For Respondent No.4 : Mr. Anupam Dubey, Advocate SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 11.04.2025 1. Since common issue is involved in these four writ petitions, they have been clubbed together, heard together
Decision
and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The petitioners herein filed these four writ petitions calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the order dated 25.02.2016 (Annexure P-1) by which the appointment of the petitioners on the post of Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) has been cancelled without affording them any reasonable opportunity of hearing. Further case of the petitioners is that pursuant to the orders passed by this Court on 30.09.2008 in Writ Petition (S) Nos.5391 of 5 WPS No. 1392 of 2016 & Ors. 2008, 5393 of 2008, 5394 of 2008, 5395 of 2008, the appointment order was given to the petitioners vide Annexure P/4 dated 27.08.2015. However, by order of Respondent No.4 herein dated 25.02.2016 (Annexure P/1), the appointment of the petitioners on the post of Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) was cancelled on the ground that at that time the said post was banned by the State Government against which these writ petitions have been filed. 3. Mr. Saleem Kazi, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that no reasonable opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioners before cancelling the order of appointment which is arbitrary, contrary and also bad in law and, therefore, the impugned order (Annexure P/1) dated 25.02.2016 passed by Respondent No.4 herein is liable to be quashed. 4. Mr. Rahul Tamaskar and Mr. Anupam Dubey, learned counsel for respective respondents, submit that since the State Government has imposed the ban on appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher (Panchayat), the appointment order dated 27.08.2015 (Annexure P/4) has 6 WPS No. 1392 of 2016 & Ors. rightly been revoked by Respondent No.4 herein vide order dated 25.02.2016 (Annexure P/1). Therefore, the instant petitions are liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein above and perused the records minutely. 6. Admittedly, the petitioners were appointed on the post of the Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) vide order dated 27.08.2015 (Annexure P/4), but all of a sudden vide order dated 25.02.2016 passed by respondent No.4 herein, the appointment order of the petitioners has been revoked which is in teeth of principles of natural justice and also bad in law. Even otherwise, the petitioners herein have not been afforded any opportunity of hearing to raise the ground against the canellation order of appointment vide Annexure P/1. 7. In view of the aforesaid discussion and analysis, the impugned order dated 25.02.2016 is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Pamgarh/Respondent No.4 herein to decide the 7 WPS No. 1392 of 2016 & Ors. matter of the petitioners afresh within the period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. However, the petitioners are at liberty to file representation along with copy of this order and other relevant documents before Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Pamgarh/respondent No.4 within 15 days from today. 8. With aforesaid observation/direction these four writ petitions are disposed of. No cost(s). s ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA Saxena Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge