Disposed

Raj Narayan Patel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC15 Sept 2026WPS/6735/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought direction for the competent authority to decide his pending claim for consequential benefit of a quashed departmental order. The court directed the authority to decide the representation within 30 days but expressly abstained from deciding the merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the pending representation within 30 days from receipt of a copy of this order.

Raj Narayan Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

1 / 2

CGHC010358202026

2026:CGHC:40363

NAFR

Digitally signed by JYOTI JYOTI SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2026.09.17 10:39:32 +0530

¶6

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

WPS No. 6735 of 2026

¶8

Raj Narayan Patel S/o. K. N. Patel Aged About 68 Years Retd. Assistant Engineer, R/o 32, Ravi Nagar Colony, Raipur (C.G.)

¶9

... Petitioner(s)

¶10

versus

¶11

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Town Administration And Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)

¶12

2. Director, Town Administration And Development Department, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.)

¶13

3. Commissioner, Raipur Municipal Corporation, White House Near Rang Mandir, Budhapara, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.)

¶14

... Respondent(s)

¶15

(Cause title is taken from Case Information System)

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr. Shashi Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate For Respondents/ : Mr. Anandi Sharma, P.L. State For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate

¶17

(HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU)

¶18

Order on Board

¶19

16/09/2026

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was inflicted with the punishment of stoppage of one increment by the Commissioner, Raipur, vide order dated 03.07.2009 (Annexure P- 1). Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred a departmental appeal before the Divisional Commissioner, Raipur, which was allowed vide order dated 20.10.2021 (Annexure P-9), whereby the order dated 03.07.2009 imposing the punishment of stoppage of one increment upon the petitioner was quashed. He

¶21

2 / 2

¶22

further submits that despite the aforesaid appellate order, the consequential benefit has not been incorporated in the service book of the petitioner. In this regard, the petitioner has already submitted a representation dated 21.10.2021 (Annexure P-10), which is still pending consideration. He, therefore, prays that the competent authority may be directed to consider and decide the said representation within a stipulated period.

¶23

Learned counsel appearing for the Municipal Corporation submits that, if the representation dated 21.10.2021 is pending consideration, the same shall be considered and decided by the competent authority, in accordance with law, within a period of 30 days.

¶24

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

¶25

In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider and decide the pending representation dated 21.10.2021 (Annexure P-10) submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶26

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner. The competent authority shall take an appropriate decision in accordance with law.

¶27

Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE

¶28

Jyoti

Raj Narayan Patel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Narayan Patel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases