2014 Supreme(Chh) 253
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
SANJAY K. AGRAWAL, J.
Komal Prasad Dhruv – Petitioner
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh and others - respondents
WRIT PETITION (S) No. 2881/2013
Decided on: 31/10/2014
Advocate Appeared
Mr. R.R. Soni, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Samir Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Y.S. Thakur, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Ajit Singh, P.L. for the State/respondents No. 1 to 4 & 7.
None for respondents No. 5 & 6 though served.
Headnote:
Petitioner’s father working on post of Assistant Gram Panchayat Officer, Gram Panchayat Gadamor, Janpad Panchayat Navagarh, District Durg, died in harness - Petitioner herein being son made an application in prescribed format on Annexure for grant of compassionate appointment to Deputy Director, Panchayat and Social Welfare, District Durg - Respondent No. 3 forwarded said application to Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Navagarh, District Durg for necessary action - Respondent sent all documents to respondent and also sent original papers to Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Durg stating that since salary of deceased Late was drawn from Office of Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Navagarh, District Durg, therefore, it is being sent to him as services of Assistant Gram Panchayat Officer has already been handed over to Janpad Panchayat and request earlier made was reiterated by order Annexure P7 and in turn, respondent sent matter to Collector Durg for taking decision on his application in accordance with law and copy was endorsed to respondent for needful action - Application remained pending in Office of respondent leading to issuance of reminder by respondent to respondent No. (Annexure P10) for taking decision on application filed by petitioner but no decision was taken by competent authority i.e. Collector Durg, respondent No. 4 – Held, court consider that it must be stated unequivocally that in all claims for appointment on compassionate grounds, there should not be any delay in appointment - Purpose of providing appointment on compassionate ground is to mitigate hardship due to death of bread earner in the family - Such appointment should, therefore, be provided immediately to redeem family in distress - It is improper to keep such case pending for years - If there is no suitable post for appointment supernumerary post should be created to accommodate applicant - As a fallout and in consequence of aforesaid discussion, writ petition is allowed. Impugned order passed by Collector Durg is hereby quashed - Respondent is directed to reconsider petitioner’s application for grant of appointment on compassionate ground in accordance with policy/circular, which was prevalent at time of death of his father on its own merit within forty five days from today - Petitioner is entitled to cost quantified which will be paid to petitioner within four weeks – Order accordingly.
1. Petitioner’s father Shri Shyam Lal Dhruv working on the post of Assistant Gram Panchayat Officer, Gram Panchayat Gadamor, Janpad Panchayat Navagarh, District Durg, died in harness on 06/01/2007. Petitioner herein being son made an application in prescribed format on 12/03/2007 (Annexure P3) for grant of compassionate appointment to the Deputy Director, Panchayat and Social Welfare, District Durg (respondent No. 3 herein). The respondent No. 3 forwarded the said application to the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Navagarh, District Durg (respondent No. 6 herein) for necessary action. The respondent No. 6 sent all the documents to the respondent No. 3 and also sent the original papers to the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Durg (respondent No. 5 herein) stating that since the salary of the deceased Late Shri Shyam Lal Dhruv was drawn from the Office of the Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Navagarh, District Durg, therefore, it is being sent to him as the services of Assistant Gram Panchayat Officer has already been handed over to Janpad Panchayat on 18/08/2006, and request earlier made was reiterated by order dated 03/09/2007 (Annexure P7) and in turn, the respondent No. 6 sent the matter to the Collector Durg (respondent No. 4 herein) for taking decision on his application in accordance with law and copy was endorsed to respondent No. 5 for needful action. The said application remained pending in the Office of respondent No. 4 leading to issuance of reminder by respondent No. 6 to the respondent No. 5 dated 03/12/2010 (Annexure P10) for taking decision on the application filed by the petitioner but no decision was taken by competent authority i.e. Collector Durg, respondent No. 4.
2. Ultimately, the petitioner filed W.P.(S) No. 4012/2011 (Komal Prasad Dhruv v. State of C.G. and Others) before this Court, seeking expeditious consideration of his application for compassionate appointment in which, it was directed by order dated 26/07/2011 to the respondent No. 4 i.e. Collector Durg to decide the case of the petitioner relating to compassionate appointment in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, which was brought to the notice of respondent No. 4 by petitioner through application dated 08/08/2011 (Annexure P12).
3. Thereafter, the respondent No. 4 took two years in considering the application and finally by its order dated 01/07/2013 placing reliance on circular issued by the State Government dated 03/03/2011 and the executive instructions relating to compassionate appointment issued on 14/06/2013 held that petitioner’s case is time barred, as he has not made an application within three months from the date of death of his father and sent the original application to the Deputy Director, Panchayat and Social Welfare, District Durg (respondent No. 3 herein) with a copy to the petitioner.
4. Impugning the legality and validity of the order rejecting his claim for compassionate appointment, petitioner has filed instant writ petition seeking an appropriate writ for quashment of order dated 01/07/2013 (Annexure P1) stating that he is entitled for compassionate appointment on the basis of policy/circular, which was in existence on the date of death of his father, that is 06/01/2007 and the application was made for compassionate appointment on 12/03/2007 and as such, the application was well within time as prescribed in the policy/circular dated 01/05/2000, 15/12/2000 and 02/02/2006 and has sought an appropriate writ directing the State Government to consider his case for compassionate appointment strictly in view of the policy/circular, which was in existence at the time of death of his father and date of submission of his application.
5. The respondents/State has filed its return stating that the petitioner’s father was an employee of Janpad Panchayat Navagarh, therefore, the petitioner was required to submit his application for appointment on compassionate ground before the competent autho