Disposed¶35

Mukesh Kumar Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC3 May 2026WPS/3834/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Panchayat Sachiv regularization; direction to constitute committee and decide grievance within 90 days; legitimate expectation and promissory estoppel plea based on Chief Minister's declaration and Secretariat communication dated 02.05.2022; Panchayat Karmi (Sachiv) appointed 17.12.2021 under Zila Panchayat Mungeli; time-bound mandamus; WPS No. 3834 of 2026; High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur; Parth Prateem Sahu, J.; writ petition finally disposed.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the concerned respondent authorities to decide the grievance of the petitioners by way of constitution of the committee and to pass appropriate orders within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order. ¶35

Mukesh Kumar Baghel Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent authorities should be directed to consider and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the constitution of the committee (as notified vide memo dated 02.05.2022), with consequential orders issued strictly on the committee's recommendations, so that the petitioner's grievance regarding regularization of Panchayat Sachivs is adjudicated in a just and timely manner. +1 more

¶29

Court's answer

The concerned respondent authorities are directed to decide the grievance of the petitioners by way of constitution of the committee and to pass appropriate orders within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur (Parth Prateem Sahu, J.) disposed of WPS No. 3834 of 2026, a writ petition by a serving Panchayat Sachiv (appointed vide letter dated 17.12.2021) seeking directions that the committee for deciding the grievances of Panchayat Sachivs — whose constitution was declared by the Hon'ble Chief Minister and notified vide memo dated 02.05.2022 — submit its report and that the State decide the petitioner's grievance for regularization of Panchayat Sachivs into the State Government cadre in a time-bound manner, the petitioner pleading legitimate expectation and promissory estoppel. The State stated that the competent authorities would pass appropriate orders within 90 days. The Court directed the concerned respondent authorities to decide the grievance of the petitioners by way of constitution of the committee and to pass appropriate orders within 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order, and with that observation and direction finally disposed of the writ petition.

2026:CGHC:20614

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 3834 of 2026

¶6

Mukesh Kumar Baghel S/o Dhaniram Baghel Aged About 57 Years Presently Posted As Panchayat Sachiv, At Gram Panchayat- Bartori (Kodwa), Janpad Panchayat - Tilda, Zila Panchayat- Raipur, DistrictRaipur (C.G.)

¶7

... Petitioner(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶10

2 - Additional Chief Secretary Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶11

3 - Director Directorate Of Panchayat, Sector-19, North Block, Vikas Bhawan, Ground Floor, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶12

4 - Collector Raipur, DistrictRaipur (C.G.)

¶13

5 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶14

¶15

6 - Committee For Deciding The Grievance Of Panchayat Sachiv, Through Its Chairman, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶16

... Respondent(s)

¶17

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rohit Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Anuja Sharma, Dy. G.A.

¶18

Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

¶19

Order on Board

¶20

04/05/2026

¶21

Petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:

¶22

10.1 To issue appropriate writ/order or direction and thereby direct the respondent authority/committee to submit its report to the state government in a time bound manner preferably within a period of two month.

¶23

10.2 To issue appropriate writ/order or direction and thereby direct the respondent state to decide the grievance of the petitioners in a time bound manner. 10.3 Grant any other relief(s)/order(s)/direction(s) in favour of petitioner, which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the cost to the petitioner.

¶24

Brief facts of the case, is that, petitioner has been appointed as Panchayat Karmi (Sachiv) in respective Gram Panchayat under the territorial jurisdiction of Zila Panchayat Mungeli vide letter dated 17.12.2021 (Annexure P/1) and he continue to function as employee of the respective Gram Panchayat under the general control of the State Government. Considering the long standing

¶25

¶26

demand for regularization of Panchayat Sachivs into the State Government cadre, the respondent State of Chhattisgarh, as a matter of policy, has acknowledged this issue, and the Hon’ble Chief Minister publicly declared the constitution of a committee to examine the matter and to take appropriate steps in furtherance of the legitimate expectations of the petitioner. Pursuant to this declaration, the Secretariat of the Chief Minister issued a formal communication to the Chief Secretary as well as to the Secretary, Panchayat and Gramin Vikas Vibhag, directing them to act upon the declaration and to periodically update the Chief Minister’s office. However, despite the lapse of more than a year since the declaration and the subsequent official communication, no substantive action has been taken. The declaration of the Chief Minister and the consequent communication from the Secretariat have created a right of legitimate expectation and promissory estoppel in favour of the petitioners and others similarly situated, thereby necessitating timely compliance regarding constitution of the committee and further proceedings for regularization of Panchayat Sachivs as government employees. Although the Chief Minister, being the head of the State Government, has taken a conscious decision after considering the peculiar circumstances and long-pending demands of the petitioners, and the concerned authorities are duty-bound to act in accordance with the communications issued, the respondents have failed to take any concrete steps, thereby frustrating the legitimate expectations of

¶27

¶28

the petitioners through an act contrary to law. Despite the issuance of the communicated dated 02.05.2022 by the Chief Minister’s Secretariat for giving effect to the declaration, the respondents have not complied with the directions in letter and spirit, resulting in infringement of the petitioner’s right to legitimate expectation. As policies are required to operate within a reasonable time frame, the deliberate inaction in constituting the committee has jeopardized the rights of the petitioner, thereby warranting appropriate directions from this Hon’ble Court to uphold the principles of legitimate expectation and promissory estoppel. Hence, this writ petition has been filed.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petition has been instituted seeking a limited but necessary direction to the competent authorities to consider and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the constitution of the committee, as notified vide memo dated 02.05.2022, and further to ensure that consequential orders are issued strictly on the basis of the recommendations made by the said committee, so that the petitioner’s lawful claim may be adjudicated in a just and timely manner.

¶30

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that the respondents are actively considering the petitioner’s claim and, in this regard, they undertake that the competent authorities shall pass appropriate and necessary orders in accordance with law within a period of 90 days, thereby ensuring that the grievance

¶31

¶32

raised in the present petition is duly examined and decided within the stipulated timeframe.

¶33

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶34

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the fact that the concerned respondent authorities are directed to decide the grievance of the petitioners by way of constitution of the committee and to pass appropriate orders within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶35

With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands finally disposed of.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

(Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE

¶38

Madhurima

Mukesh Kumar Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Kumar Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raghunandan Prasad Joshi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mohammed Mustakeem Vs Amitabh Mukharjee

Prabhu Lal Markam Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ram Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Amrit Shende Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rishabh Kushwaha Vs State of Chhattisgarh