Ku. Vatsla Soni v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 537 of 2019 Ku. Vatsla Soni D/o Shri Khageshwar Prasad Soni, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Tehsil Sakti Village Portha ,block Sakti, Post Portha ,police Station Sakti District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary Department Of School Education Mahanadi Bhawan Mantrlaya Capital Complex Naya Raipur ,police Station Rakhi ,district Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. The Collector Kabirdham ,district Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

3. The District Education Officer Kabirdham District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

4. The Block Education Officer Block Baloda District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

----Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For State :

Mr. Saleem Kazi, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 25/01/2019

1. The claim of the petitioner raised in the present writ petition is the non-consideration of her claim for compassionate appointment.

2. The facts relevant in the present case is that the mother of the petitioner was a Government employee who died in harness on 15/03/02. At the time of the death of the deceased employee, the petitioner as well as her sister both were minors. The elder sister attained the age of majority in the year 2009 and claimed for compassionate appointment in the year 2010. However, before the Department could take a decision on her application, she committed suicide on 02/12/13. Meanwhile, the petitioner also attained the age of majority and after the death of the elder sister, the petitioner

moved an application for being considered for compassionate appointment against the death of the deceased employee, the mother of the petitioner namely late Smt. Chandrakala Soni.

3. According to the petitioner, the application of the petitioner is still under consideration before the authority, though a substantial period has lapsed, no final decision has been taken. The petitioner submits that an appropriate direction be given to respondents No. 2 and 3 to take an appropriate decision on the claim of the petitioner at the earliest.

4. To the said limited prayer, the State Counsel does not oppose and the writ petition therefore, stands disposed off with a direction to respondent No. 2 as well as respondent No. 3 to scrutinize the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment and pass an appropriate order at the earliest preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

5. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed off.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Harneet