Smt. Vandana Sirmour v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 529 of 2020 Smt. Vandana Sirmour W/o Late Umesh Kumar Sirmour Aged About 33 Years Presently Working as Assistant Sub-Inspector (M) At Office of Superintendent of Police, Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Department of Home, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director General of Police Police Head Quarter, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Superintendent of Police Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents For the Petitioner : Mr. Somkant Verma, Advocate.

For the State/Respondents : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 23.01.2020

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the legal heir of the deceased employee and has come in employment by way of compassionate appointment provided by the Respodnents. He further submits that the husband of the Petitioner was working as Sub-Inspector who died in harness.

2. The grievance of the Petitioner is that despite the order passed by this Court in Writ Petition (S) No. 4563 of 2006 and the order passed by the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No. 426 of 2011 on 23.2.2011 against which, the Supreme Court has dismissed the Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 13274 of 2013, the benefits made admissible to the similarly placed persons vide order dated 03.12.2013 issued by the Home Department, has not been

extended to the Petitioner. He submits that the Director General of Police has already issued a communication on 28.9.2013 for extending similar benefits to all the similarly placed persons, but yet necessary orders have not been passed.

3. Learned Counsel for the State however submits that in the event, if the Petitioner submits a fresh representation before the competent authority her case shall be scrutinized, and after due verification if it is found that her case is similar, she shall be entitled to all such benefits available to her in accordance with law.

4. In view of above, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in the event, if the Petitioner submits a fresh representation before the competent authority claiming similar treatment as has been extended to the previous set of petitioners in whose favour order dated 3.12.2013 has been passed, within a period of one month from today, the competent authority shall scrutinize her case and if on verification it is found that the Petitioner is identically placed, necessary orders in this regard be passed in accordance with law within a further period of two months.

5. If any adverse order is passed against the Petitioner, she would be at liberty to move afresh before this Court.

6. The present writ petition stands accordingly finally disposed of. Sd/- (GOUTAM BHADURI) JUDGE Rao