Dismissed¶29

Rupesh Kumar Pandey v. State of Chhattisgarh

Service law – Suspension

Chhattisgarh HC21 Jun 2026WPS/4635/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WPS No. 4635 of 2026, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, decided 22/06/2026 by Bibhu Datta Guru, J. (NAFR). Keywords: suspension; Rule 9(1)(a); Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966; CCA Rules 1966; Clauses 10(i) to (iv); Divisional Commissioner as disciplinary authority; Class-II officer; Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Durg; jurisdictional error; circular dated 04/08/2008; WPS No. 2062 of 2016; writ petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The impugned suspension order was passed by the Divisional Commissioner exercising power as the disciplinary authority of the petitioner, who as CEO is a Class-II Officer. ¶28

Rupesh Kumar Pandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

1 / 3

2026:CGHC:25329

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 4635 of 2026

¶6

Rupesh Kumar Pandey S/o Shri Mathura Prasad Pandey Aged About 53 Years R/o Presently Working As Incharge Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Durg District Durg C.G.

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- Its Principal Secretary Panchayt And Rural Development Department Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur Atal Nagar District Raipur C.G.

¶10

2 - Commissioner Durg Division Durg District Durg C.G.

¶11

3 - Collector District Durg District Durg C.G.

¶12

4 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Durg District Durg C.G.

¶13

5 - Shri Puran Singh Deshmukh S/o Girdhari Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Khanda Tehsil And District Durg C.G. Presently State To Be Mandal Mahamantri Bharatiya Janta Party Anda /nankum Mandal District Durg C.G.

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

For Petitioner	:	Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate
For State/Respondents	:	Mr. Gary Mukhopadhyay, Additional
No.1 to 3		Advocate General

¶16

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru)

¶17

Order on Board

¶18

Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH ASHUTOSH MISHRA MISHRA Date: 2026.06.23 10:50:25 +0530

22/06/2026

2 / 3

Heard.

By way of the instant petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 01/06/2026 (Annexure P/9) passed by Respondent No.2 whereby the petitioner, who was working as Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Durg has been suspended under Rule 9(1) (a) of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the CCA Rules, 1966).

¶23

After arguing at length learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as far as the merit of the petition is concerned he is to approach the appellate authority but he is only questioning the jurisdictional error in the order passed by the Divisional Commissioner.

¶24

Per contra, learned State counsel, on instructions, would submit that the circular dated 04/08/2008 which is a circular issued by the State Government empowers the Divisional Commissioner to impose punishment under Clauses 10 (i) to (iv) of the CCA Rules, 1966, hence the Divisional Commissioner is the disciplinary authority of the employee/petitioner, who is a Class-II Officer and the Commissioner has passed the order by exercising the jurisdiction and the said order is just and proper. He referred to the order passed by this Court in WPS No.2062 of 2016 wherein the same circular has been considered and the same issue has been taken.

¶25

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents.

¶26

From perusal of the impugned order dated 01/06/2026 it appears that the order has been passed by the Divisional Commissioner by exercising

¶27

3 / 3

¶28

power as a disciplinary authority of the CEO who is a Class-II Officer. Hence there is no illegality in the order passed by the Divisional Commissioner and the contention of the petitioner that the suspension order suffers from the jurisdictional error is not acceptable.

¶29

Accordingly, the instant writ petition being devoid of merits is liable to be and hereby dismissed, in respect of issue of competence of the authority who has passed the order of suspension.

¶30

SD/- ( Bibhu Datta Guru ) JUDGE

¶31

ashu

Rupesh Kumar Pandey v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rupesh Kumar Pandey v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. R.K. Namdev Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Keshaw Ram Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rupesh Kumar Pandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Mankunwar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Harihar Sevak Barik Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sahash Ram Chonk Vs State of Chhattisgarh