C732 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 2407 of 2009 PETITIONER Sagun Singh Thakur S/O Late Shri Madho Singh Thakur, aged about 49 years, Additional Offlce Asstt. Gr. II. O/o The Junior Engineer, C.S. Power Distribution Co. Ltd., Bijapur, D/Centre, Tah. & Distt. Bijapur (Baster) (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1. Chhattisgarh State Power Holding Co. Ltd, Through Joint Secretary (Personal) II Head Quarter Danganiya, Raipur (C.G.) 2. S.R.Bandhey Executive Engineer (0&M) Dn. C.S. Power Distribution C0. Ltd, Balod, Tah. Balod, Distt. Durg (C.G.) 3. Kailash Narnaware, \Ex-Superintending Engineer (Durg Circle) C.S. Power Distribution, Co. Ltd, Durg. Tah. & Distt. Durg (C.G.) Now Executive Engineer (City) Dn. C.S. Power Distribution C0. Ltd, Durg, Tah. Distt. Durg (C.G.) 4. Azad Kurnar Jain (Retd.) Ex-Chief Engineer, (Raipur Region) C.S. Power Distribution Co. Ltd, Raipur, Tall. & Distt. Raipur (C.G.) Now Adv-is‘or of C.S. Power Holding Co. Ltd. Danganiya, Raipur Tah. & Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 5. B.R.Dhruw, Senior Accounts Officer (Retd.) C.S.Powe1‘ Holding Co. Ltd. Durg (C.G.) 6. N.S.Thakur, Section Officer (Retd.) O/o The Executive Engineer (O&M) Dn. C.S. Power Distribution’Co‘. Ltd‘ Balod, Tah. Balod Distt. Durg (C.G.) \ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Amit N SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. A nihofri J. Shri C.R.Sahu, Advocate for the petitioner. ORAL ORDER (Passed onF llt day of May, 2009) Heard learned counsel for the parties. By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of charge—sheet dated 10.05.2007. (Annexure P/l) containing five charges of alleged irregul Present: arities committed by the petitioner in exercise of his functions. The petitioner: after a period of two years, has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking quashing of charge—sheet on the ground that no case for misconduct has been made out. petitioner has not made out any Admittedly, there is no dispute that the enquiry officer has been appointed and the departmental enquiry is in progress. At this stage, the circumstance existing in favour of the petitioner warranting interference with the enquiry proceedings. consideration, the petitioner may raise all the issues, as advised, before the enquiry committee. Accordingly, the’jaetition-is dismissed being devoid of merits. il 7 7 i Sd/- l Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ‘i i special ground or extraordinary Since the enquiry is pending