Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 23677
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Bibhu Datta Guru, J
ADARSH BAGHEL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
WPS No. 348 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Pramod Ramteke
For the Respondents: Akansha Verma, Manas Vajpai, Sandeep Dubey
The court directed the competent authority to decide a pending application for compassionate appointment within 50 days through a reasoned and speaking order, emphasizing that such appointments are intended to provide immediate financial relief to the bereaved family.
Headnote:(A) Compassionate Appointment - Delay in Decision - The object of compassionate appointment is to provide immediate financial assistance to the bereaved family of a deceased employee; therefore, pending applications must be decided by the competent authority in accordance with applicable rules and policy within a reasonable timeframe. (Para 2, 4)
Issues: Whether the respondent authorities are required to decide the pending application for compassionate appointment within a stipulated time.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks compassionate appointment following the death of his father. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. respondent agrees to decide the pending application within 50 days. (Para 3) |
| 3. court directs decision on application via reasoned order within 50 days. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
(Cause title taken from CIS)
Order on Board
1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to consider and grant compassionate appointment in his favour as a dependent of his deceased father, Late Deepak Baghel, who passed away on 15.12.2019 while serving as a Sanitation Worker in the Nagar Palik Nigam, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, under respondent No. 4.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that, following the demise of his father, he submitted an application dated 17.01.2020 seeking compassionate appointment. However, despite the lapse of a considerable period, the said application has not yet been decided by the competent authority. It is contended that the inordinate delay in deciding the application defeats the very object of compassionate appointment, which is intended to provide immediate financial assistance to the bereaved family of a deceased employee.
3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Corporation submits that the petitioner's pending application for compassionate appointment shall be considered and decided by the competent authority, strictly in accordance with the applicable rules and policy governing compassionate appointments, within a period of 50 days.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the limited prayer made by the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the present petition pending. Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the petitioner's claim, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority/respondent No. 4 to consider and decide the petitioner's application dated 17.01.2020 (Annexure P/2) for grant of compassionate appointment, in accordance with law and the applicable policy, by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 50 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment. The competent authority shall consider and decide the petitioner's application independently and strictly in accordance with law, without being influenced by any observation contained in this order.
6. With the aforesaid directions and observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
