Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 25149
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J
Vijay Laxmi Dhruw – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
WPS No. 3859 of 2020
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Yogeshwar Sharma
For the Respondents: Sharad Mishra
If a family member of a deceased government servant is already in government service and the policy bars other dependents, the court will not order an inquiry into financial dependency to grant compassionate appointment.
Headnote:(A) Compassionate Appointment - Eligibility - Family member in Government Service - Where the applicable policy prohibits the consideration of other dependents for appointment on compassionate grounds if one family member is already in government service, the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India shall not direct an enquiry into the actual financial dependency or support provided by the employed member to others. (Para 5)
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to compassionate appointment despite her brother being in government service.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. dispute regarding eligibility for compassionate appointment when a sibling is employed in government service. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. judicial restraint in ordering dependency inquiries when policy bars appointment due to existing family employment. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. application of the full bench ruling to dismiss the claim for compassionate appointment. (Para 6) |
Order on Board
1. This writ petition is directed against impugned order dated 08.08.2019 by which petitioner’s application for grant of compassionate appointment has been rejected on the ground that her younger brother is already in Government employment.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that brother of the petitioner namely Purushottam Dhruw, who is in Government service used to reside separately and he is not maintaining petitioner. As such, the petitioner is entitled for grant of compassionate appointment.
3. On the other hand, learned State Counsel submits that the Full Bench of this Court has already decided this issue in WA No.236 of 2022, decide on 07.07.2023, and, therefore, the present petitioner is not entitled for grant of compassionate appointment.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein-above and went through the record.
5. The question involved in this case is no longer res integra. The Full Bench of this Court vide its order dated 21.06.2023 has held as under:
“When one of the family members of the deceased Government servant is already in Government service and the applicable policy bars and prohibits the consideration of other dependent of the deceased Government servant for appointment on compassionate ground, then this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would not direct for holding enquiry qua dependency/ financial support by one of the family members of the deceased Government servant who is already in Government service to the other family members of the deceased Government servant when a claim is made by other member of the family for compassionate appointment, as it would amount to rephrasing/ rewording of the terms of the applicable scheme/ policy for compassionate appointment, as such, such enquiry is totally barred.”
6. In that view of the matter, admittedly, since brother of the petitioner namely Purushottam Dhruw is already in Government Service (Chhattisgarh Police Cadre) the claim of the present petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment has rightly been rejected by the respondents. I do not find any merit in this petition. It is accordingly dismissed.
