Compassionate appointment in a work-charged establishment does not automatically preclude an employee from being considered for promotion to a higher grade, provided they meet the requisite eligibility criteria and parity is maintained with similarly situated employees.

Digitally signed by SHAYNA 2026:CGHC:6015 KADRI NAFR

(Cause-title is taken from Case Information System)

Order on Board

1. The present writ petition is being filed seeking following reliefs:-

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to call for entire Records from the office of the respondents in respect of Petitioner's claim.

10.2 That, the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondents Authorities to grant promotion of the post of Assistant Grade-III from class IV employee with all consequential benefit.

10.3 That, any other Writ, order directions or relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit may kindly be passed in favor of the petitioner.”

2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner was initially appointed as a work-charged employee on the post of Dok Runner vide order dated 27.02.2004 in the pay band of Rs. 2550-25-55-2660-60-3200 with grade salary of Rs. 2550/-, issued by the respondent authorities, on compassionate grounds owing to the death of his father, Late Kamlesh Kumar Shukla, who was an employee of the department and died during the course of service, the petitioner being his son, whereafter the petitioner continuously discharged his duties and was subsequently promoted vide order dated 31.07.2018 passed by respondent No. 7 to the post of Skilled Assistant in the pay scale of Rs. 16100-50900, pursuant to which he joined the promoted post. The petitioner possesses Higher Secondary School Certificate, B.A. and M.A. degrees and thus fulfills the requisite educational qualifications as well as experience prescribed for promotion from Class-IV to Class-III category (Assistant Grade-III). There are a large number of vacant posts of Assistant Grade-III available in the department, as reflected from the gradation list, against which the petitioner’s claim could be considered. As per circular dated 25.10.2002 issued by the General Administration Department, work-charged contingency paid employees are entitled to appointment on regular establishment and consequential promotion, and further as per State circulars dated 15.11.1984 and 24.05.1996, 15% of Class-III posts are reserved for promotion from Class-IV employees subject to the qualification of Higher Secondary pass and five years’ experience, both of which are fulfilled by the petitioner; that despite this, the petitioner’s claim for promotion has not been considered merely on the ground that his initial appointment was on compassionate basis, which is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to settled law. The petitioner submitted representations/reminders seeking promotion to Class-III category, but no response or decision has been taken by the respondent authorities till date. The gradation list issued by the respondents does not correctly reflect the petitioner’s educational qualifications of graduation and post-graduation; and that similarly situated employees have already been granted promotion from Class-IV to Class-III pursuant to orders passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 2788/2015 ( Abhishek Tiwari v. State of Chhattisgarh ) and W.P.(S) No. 7369/2022 ( Smt. Gouri Kesharwani v. State of Chhattisgarh ), yet the petitioner, despite having requisite qualification, experience and availability of vacancies, has been denied consideration for promotion, compelling him to approach this Court by filing the present petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the continued inaction on the part of the respondent authori