BHUPENDRA KUMAR SAHU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Akash Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Vinay Pandey, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State.

(2.) By filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the enquiry report dtd. 14/5/2026 submitted by the Committee (Annexure P/2) and the consequential order dtd. 15/5/2026 issued by the Chief Conservator of Forests, Bilaspur, insofar as the same pertains to and affects the petitioner. The petitioner has also questioned the suspension order dtd. 22/5/2026 (Annexure P/4) and seeks a direction restraining the respondent authorities from initiating any departmental enquiry against him.

(3.) Mr. Akash Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner, an Assistant Grade-II posted in Forest Division, Marwahi, has been subjected to adverse action on the basis of a fact-finding report dtd. 14/5/2026 and the consequential recommendation dtd. 15/5/2026 arising out of a complaint alleging misappropriation of ₹14,77,600/- in connection with the purchase of cow dung manure. It is contended that the principal allegations were directed against the then Divisional Forest Officer, Mr. Raunak Goyal, and other senior officials; however, despite being the subject matter of the complaint, the said officer was permitted to participate in the enquiry and contribute to the preparation of the report. Learned counsel would submit that the composition of the committee itself gives rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias, as two members were subordinate to the DFO and the third was his junior, thereby rendering the enquiry unfair and lacking in independence.