Compassionate appointment is barred if another family member of the deceased government servant is already in government service, regardless of whether that member provides financial support to the rest of the family.

Order on Board

1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the order dated 31.10.2025 passed by the respondent authority, whereby the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds has been rejected.

2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner is the son of Late Shri Laxman Das Chouhan, who was serving under the Police Department on the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police and died on 23.09.2020 due to the Covid-19 pandemic. After the death of the deceased employee, the petitioner was left along with the other legal heirs of the deceased employee.

3. It is further submitted that after the death of his father, the petitioner submitted an application seeking appointment on compassionate grounds before the respondent authority. The petitioner’s application, however, came to be rejected by the respondent authority vide order dated 31.10.2025 on the ground that the second wife of the deceased employee is already in Government service. The petitioner is aggrieved by the said order and has, therefore, preferred the present writ petition before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent authority has rejected the claim of the petitioner without properly appreciating his entitlement under the circular dated 14.06.2013. It is further submitted that respondent No.7, namely Smt. Uma Tiwari, failed to establish that she is the legally wedded wife of the deceased employee. It is submitted that earlier respondent No.7 had filed Civil Revision No. 286/2025 before this Court claiming death-cum-retiral benefits of the deceased employee, which came to be dismissed vide order dated 12.05.2026.

5. Per contra, learned State counsel would submit that the application of the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment has been rejected by the competent authority in accordance with the applicable rules/policy observing that the second wife of the deceased employee is already in Government service. Thus, there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order dated 31.10.2025.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents attached with the petition.

7. The contention of the petitioner that the deceased employee's second wife, Smt. Uma Tiwari, is residing separately and that she is not extending any financial assistance to the family also does not persuade this Court to interfere. The competent authority considered the petitioner's claim in accordance with the compassionate appointment policy prevailing on the date of consideration and found the petitioner ineligible on account of the fact that one member of the deceased employee's family, namely, his second wife Smt. Uma Tiwari, was already in Government service as Assistant Class-III in the Irrigation Department, Chhuikhadan. In terms of Clause (6)(A) of the Consolidated Revised Instructions, 2013 issued by the General Administration Department, Government of Chhattisgarh, where another member of the family of a deceased married Government servant is already in Government service, no other member of the family is eligible for compassionate appointment. Once the policy prescribes such a disqualification, the authority was bound to act in terms thereof, and this Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot direct relaxation of the policy