Umesh Kumar v. Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Ltd. Cspdcl And ANR.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1538 of 2015 Umesh Kumar S/o Late Rohitram Aged About 35 years R/O- Village Reda, Tehsil- Sarangarh Civil / Revenue Dist- Raigarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Ltd. (CSPDCL) Through Its Chairman Regd Office- at Energy Info Tech Centre, Daganiya, Raipur

2. Chhattisgarh State Power Holding Company Ltd. Through Its Director General Manager (Hrd) Regd Office- At Energy Info Tech Centre, Daganiya, Raipur ---- Respondents For Petitioner :- Shri H.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate For Respondents No.1 and2 :- Shri A. S. Gaharwar, along with Shri Mazid Ali, Advocates Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 01/05/2015 1.

The grievances of the petitioner through the instant writ petition is that the petitioner being the son of Late Rohitram had moved an application for grant of compassionate appointment on account of death of his father late Rohitram in harness on 24.11.1999 is not yet being considered by respondents.

2.

At this juncture, without entering into the merit of the case, counsel for the petitioner himself submits that recently a couple of orders has been passed by the Coordinate Bench of this High Court wherein it has been directed that the petitioner may approach the concerned authority once again by moving appropriate representation pursuing their claim for grant of compassionate appointment and on such representation being made the concerned authorities of the respondents establishment may take appropriate decision in accordance with the policy dated 31.01.1997 applicable in the respondents establishment.

3.

Counsel for the petitioner referred to the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this High Court in W.P.(S) No. 6476 of 2014 and also referred to the decision rendered in the bunch of writ petitions in W.P.(S) No. 1160 of 2004 and analogous writ petitions decided on 18.12.2014. He further submits that another bunch of writ petitions has also been recently decided on 08.04.2015 in W.P.(S) No. 1026 of 2015.

4.

Considering the total facts and circumstance of the case, this Court is also inclined to dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to the petitioner to move a fresh representation to the competent authority pursuing his claim for compassionate appointment and on such application being made, the authority concerned shall take appropriate decision purely in accordance with the Rule of compassionate appointment prevailing in the respondents establishment i.e. the Policy dated 31.01.1997. 5.

Needless to mention that consideration of respondents shall be purely in accordance with the Policy governing the field, subject to the availability of sanctioned vacant post and the petitioner fulfilling all the other norms and conditions making him eligible for recruitment. 6.

With the aforesaid observation the writ petition is disposed of. (P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE Santosh