PBTITSOtIER w.p.isi^o^a743_of^gOT Birendi-a Singh son of Shri R.P. Singh, aged about 50 years, occupation Service, R/o Bishrainpur, Tahsil Surajpur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.). 1. South Eastera C^aTfieMs Limited, Seepat Road, Bilaspur (C.G), flirough its Chauinaa cum. Managing Du-ector. 2. The Chief Geneial Manager, Rehar Gayatri Jaiuagar Sub Area, S.E.C.L,, Bisluampur, TatisU Surajpur, Distt. Surguja (C.G). 3. The Deputy Chief Persoiinel Manager, Bishi-ampiu- Area, S.R.C.L., Tahsfl Surajpur, Distt. Surguja(C.G) 4. The Personnel Manager, Rehar Gayatri Jauiagai' Sub-Area, S.E.C.L., Bishrampur, T'ahsil, Surajpur, Distt. Siirgiija (C.Gj. S. The Sub-Area Maaager, Rehar Gayatri Jaiaagar Sub Area, S.E.C.L., Bisluampur, Tahsil Surajpur, Distt. Surguja (C.G). Enquiry Officer/Deuuty Personnel Manage.1-, Rehar Gayaftai Janjgir Sub Area, S.E.C.L. Bishi-anipur, Talisfl Distt. Siirguia (C.G1 Burajpiu-, o-' ^'•s^ ur iCtiSs Sliri Ashok Kumar Shukla, counsel for the. petitioner. ?t. ORAL GRDBR ,J, Heard. l^eanied coiinsel for tbe petitioner suhiaits fcat the petitioner is an einployee of S.E.C.I^. and he is keeping the possession of CoTiipany's rcsideTitial qiiarter No.lB/130 wllicb is sitaiated at BislTKanipiir, Distt. Sargiija. He a1so siioniits fliat an enquhy pRrtaining to unaiithorized occupation of tlie petitioner is pending against hnn and the. charge sheet haa been issiied against him on 29/31-5-2006 (Annexiire P-3). 1n the charge slieet, it has >P been afleged 13'iat the netitioTler is iraauthorizedly keeping tiie "-./ WPfR) 2743 of 2007 »- possession of sajd Quarter No.l-B/130 and his siich act is in violation ofClaiise 26.14 and 26.23 ofthe Ccrtified Standing Order applicable in case of respondents' organizatioTi. He filrtber siilimits that fhe said departmentai enqiijiy has not been coinpleted so far and t1ie nTipugned orAcr dated 18.01.2007 (Annexilre P-1) has been passed by the ('iepart.ment for rccovRiy of rent etc.; froin the salaiy ofthe petitioner. His silbinission is that iinless a final adjlidicatjon is n'lsde in the departmental procceriings, no orfers 1ikR flie impugnRd orfler Annexiire P-1 can be passerl. 1 oave heaiTl leanied coiinsel for the petitioner at lengtb and have aTso penised the records ofthfi writ. petition. A pcmsal ofthe charge sheet Annexnre P-3 would shoxT that violation ofClaiiscs 26.14 & 26.22 ofthe standine oi-der has been afleged against the petitionRr. Ciause 26.14 relates to unautborizcd iise or occi.ipation of Companys bungalow/ qnartci's/biiildings and or land any such propci-ty in the distody of the conipaiiy and Claiise 26.22 deais with any willfu! and deliberate act wliich. is sybvci-swe of djscipline or which may be detriniental to the int.erests of tTie Coinpany. During thc course ofargiiments, it was pojntedly asked fi-oin leanied coiinse] for flie netitioner that whet^cr tl-ie petitioner was aflotteri t.his quart.cr by ttie coTicemefi ailt1iori1y of S.E.C.L., on which he siihniits tbat no wriften order has been issued in favour of tbe petitioDer to rctain the possession of the said quarter but he is keeping possession of tlie said quai-ter on oi~a1 instnictions of Siib-Ai-F-a Manager. On siich rRply, after consideriog the facts and circuinstances of this case, in the opinion of tTiis Coilrt, it wou1d not be appropriate to qiiash tbe charge shcet dated 29/31.5.2006 (Annexiii'R P-3) as sought hy thc petitioner in the writ. petition hecause nataire of occupatioTi 'has to be adjudjcated which shall forrn the hasis of 1'nrther coiu-se to be adopted agaiiist the petifioner. Except the above groirnd no other groiinds pertainini to cbai-ge sheet have been raised by the coiinsel for t3ie petitioner, -:^wic«sacs!i=A-s,i;ss&«=.sssa»i"asSs"M... ^s^.. ^ WPCS) 2743 of 2007 therefore, this petition cannot be entertamed for qiiashiaent of the charge shcet on filis ground. As far as the order dated 18.1.2007 (Annex-iire P-1) is conceiTied wlien coiinsel for the petitioner himseif is adinittmi before this coiirt that the qiiarter is iindei- siicli occupation of tl-te petitioner, the orier of recoveiy ofcoiTiinon rent ete., OTI oriiiiaTy penal basis can not be jnterferF-d with. However, it is only obsei-ved that fhf. oiTJer Annexilre P-1 sha1l be siibject to f.he final ordera passed in the rlepartineTital enqiiiiy pending hefore flie nespondent authorities, pertaiuing to flic aUegations made against the petitioner. With tlie aforesaid obsei-vations, this petition stands finalty disposerf of. Sdl- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge v\