Digitally signed by RAM ESH 2026:CGHC:12991 KUMAR VATTI Date:

2026.03 .23 NAFR

12:35:26 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 615 of 2021 * - Tejram Chandravanshi S/o Late Jawaharlal Chandravanshi Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Aasra, P. S. And Tehsil Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2 - Director General Of Police, Chhattisgarh, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3 - Assistant Inspector General (H. R. Cell) Police Head Quarters, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4 - Superintendent Of Police, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Basant Dewangan, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Rajkumar Gupta, Additional Advocate General Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Order on Board

18/03/2026

1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-

“10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the order dated 23.11.2020, simultaneously may set- aside/quash the order dated 27.11.2020 and also direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner and grant him appointment on compassionate grounds.

10.2 That, the impugned policy dated 23.02.2019 and 29.08.2016 to the extent of total exclusion of members of family of the deceased employee for granting compassionate appointment, if already another member is employee as government servant without considering the dependency factor may be declared as illegal and arbitrary and consequently be quashed.

10.3 Any other relief in the discretion of this Hon’ble Court.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that father of petitioner, namely, Jawaharlal Chandravashi who was working on the post of Head Constable in Police Department died in harness on 10.04.2019. He further submits that though, elder brother of petitioner namely Ranchandra Chandravanshi is a government employee in Police Department, he is residing separately for years and no financial assistance has been extended by the brother. He contends that in view of the above facts and circumstances, petitioner duly applied for compassionate appointment before the respondent authorities but the respondent No.-3 and 4 vide letters/orders dated 23.11.2020 and dated 27.11.2020 rejected the application moved by petitioner. He further contends that respondent authorities ought to have considered the case of petitioner as no financial assistance has been extended by the brother to petitioner and his grandmother. He prays that a direction may be issued to respondent authorities to grant compassionate appointment to the petitioner.

3. On the other hand, learned learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State/respondents would submit that as per Clause 6A of the policy dated 29.08.2016 issued by the General Administration Department, Government of Chhattisgarh, if any family member of the deceased government servant is already employed in government service, no other family member is eligible for compassionate appointment. He has relied on the judgment passed in Writ Appeal No. 33 of 2022, State of Chhattisgarh v. Muniya Bai, wherein the Hon’ble Division Bench has categorically held that the policy does not envisage any inquiry into the financial condition of other family members, and eligibility is to be strictly decided as per the terms of the policy.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed in the instant petition.

5. In the matter of Muniya Bai (supra), the Hon’ble Division Bench, while interpreting Clause 6A of the policy governing compassionate appointments, has clearly held that if any member of the family of a deceased government servant is already in government service, no other member of the family is eligible for a compassionate appointment. Further an inquiry into the financial condition of dependents is not envi