KAMAL KISHOR SHONDILYA vs FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA Advocate - R.S.PATEL — WA/369/2026

Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 05th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010121102026

Filing Number

WA/6949/2026

Filing Date

23-Mar-2026

Registration No

WA/369/2026

Registration Date

21-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Coram

Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

SERVICE MATTERS ( 6 )

Sub-Category

COMPULSORY RETIREMENT / RETIREMENT. ( 605 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

05-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KAMAL KISHOR SHONDILYA

    Adv. SUDEEP JOHRI,DAMRUDHAR YADAV,DAMRUDHAR YADAV, ,J.K. GUPTA,DAMRUDHAR YADAV

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA Advocate - R.S.PATEL

  2. 2.Review Committee

  3. 3.Representation Committee

  4. 4.General Manager (Region)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-May-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice,Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar AgrawalView PDF

    Case Summary: WA/369/2026 Court Decision: The Chhattisgarh High Court Division Bench dismissed the appellant's appeal, upholding the Single Judge's order that denied back wages despite quashing the compulsory retirement order. The court held that back wages are not automatic upon reinstatement and depend on case-specific circumstances, including the employee's conduct and disciplinary history. Key Reasoning: While the appellant's compulsory retirement was illegal (issued before age 50, a mandatory requirement), the court exercised discretion in denying back wages given prior disciplinary proceedings and penalties, though modified. The court found the Single Judge's discretionary decision reasonable and non-arbitrary, noting that regulatory provisions don't mandate back wages in every case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-May-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

  4. 23-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WA/369/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WA/369/2026 Court Decision: The Chhattisgarh High Court Division Bench dismissed the appellant's appeal, upholding the Single Judge's order that denied back wages despite quashing the compulsory retirement order. The court held that back wages are not automatic upon reinstatement and depend on case-specific circumstances, including the employee's conduct and disciplinary history. Key Reasoning: While the appellant's compulsory retirement was illegal (issued before age 50, a mandatory requirement), the court exercised discretion in denying back wages given prior disciplinary proceedings and penalties, though modified. The court found the Single Judge's discretionary decision reasonable and non-arbitrary, noting that regulatory provisions don't mandate back wages in every case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case