NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2744 of 2014 • Sanjay Yadav S/o Late Lachkumar Yadav Aged About 23 Years R/o Chandan Nagar, Ward No. 6, Motipur, Thana Motipur , Rajnandgaon C.G. , Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Panchayat and Social Welfare Department, Mantralaya Raipur

2. Collector Rajnandgaon

3. Deputy Director, Panchayat and Social Welfare Department Rajnandgaon

4. Chief Executive OfÏcer, Janpad Panchayat, Rajnandgaon

5. Director, Panchayat and Social Welfare Department Raipur ---- Respondents CAUSE TITLE DOWNLOADED FROM CIS PERIPHERY -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Petitioner : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate For State/Respondent : Ms. Pragya Shrivastava, Deputy GA -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari

Order On Board

28.03.2024

1. This writ petition has been filed for grant of compassionate appointment and for quashing the order/memo dated 11.04.2011 (Annexure P/6) as also the memo dated 08.09.2011 (Annexure P/7), whereby, the petitioner’s claim for compassionate appointment has been rejected.

2. Brief facts of the case are that father of the petitioner namely Lach Kumar Yadav, was working as Gram Sahayak on a regular post and has died in harness on 2.12.2007. At the time of death of his father, the petitioner was minor, however, in spite of that he moved an application for compassionate appointment on 23.05.2008, but the same was not considered on the ground that he was minor. Subsequently, after attaining the age of majority, the petitioner again moved an application on 10.08.2009 (Annexure P/1), which was forwarded by respondent No.4 to respondent No.3 for providing compassionate appointment vide memo/letter dated 10.11.2009 (Annexure P/2). Thereafter, respondent No.3 issued a letter dated 8.10.2010 (Annexure P/4) to respondent No.2 informing the fact that no vacancy is available in the Directorate of Panchayat and Social Welfare Department. Further, respondent No.2 issued a letter on 29.10.2010, requiring the petitioner to furnish an afÏdavit clearly mentioning the consent of other family members and also with an undertaking to take responsibility for maintaining the family members of the deceased which have not been filed along with the application (Annexure P/5). Thereafter, the impugned memo dated 11.04.2011 (Annexure P/6) was received by the petitioner, whereby, his claim was rejected on the ground of delay (Annexure P/6). Hence, this petition has been filed on 16.06.2014.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the father of the petitioner died in harness on 02.12.2007 and at that particular time, the petitioner was minor. In the year 2008, he moved an application for compassionate appointment, however, the same was not considered on the ground that he has not attained majority and subsequently, when he attained majority, he immediately moved an application on 10.8.2009 (Annexure P/1), which goes to show that there was no delay on the part of the petitioner and the respondent authorities in fact caused delay in deciding the claim of the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment and consequently, rejected the same vide the impugned order dated 11.4.2011 (Annexure P/6) on the ground of delay, which is not sustainable. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the Department itself has not forwarded the application of the petitioner well within time and the application has not been decided by the competent authority as per the policy. Therefore, learned counsel prays to allow the petition.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that in the absence of vacant post, a candidate is not entitled to be considered for compassionate appointment. She submits that the said issue directly came before this Court in WP