High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/1684/2020disposed off

Tajendra Chandrakar, v. State Of Chhattisgarh,

2020-03-12Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR W.P.(S) No. 1684 of 2020 Tajendra Chandrakar, S/o. Late Top Lal Chandrakar, Aged About 22 Years, R/o. Village - Bhadha, Post Office - Beldar Seoni, Tehsil - Kharora, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh.

--- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through - Its Secretary, Department Of Water Resources, Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. The Engineer In Chief, Water Resources Department, Chhattisgarh, H.Q.- Indrawati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. The Chief Engineer, Mahanadi Godawari Basin, Water Resources Department, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4. The Superintending Engineer, Water Resources & Ground Water Survey Division, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

5. The Deputy Director, Water Metrology Division No.-04, Civil Line, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

--- Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate For State/Respondents :

Mr. Akanksha Jain, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 12.03.2020 Heard

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the father of the petitioner namely Tap Lal Chandrakar, who was Gauge Reader, died on harness on 05.05.2017. It is contended that the petitioner thereafter has made an application for compassionate appointment and the said application has been recommended by the Superintending Engineer, Water Resources and the Deputy Director, Water Metrology Division who are working under the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department; therefore, the final call has to be taken by the Chief Engineer for appointment which may be directed to be decided.

2. Considering the fact that the application has been made for compassionate appointment and since the document also purports that the application for compassionate appointment has been forwarded and recommended, the respondents are directed to decide the case of the petitioner within an outer limit of 4 months about the entitlement of compassionate appointment and pass a speaking order according to the rules as prevailing.

3. With the aforesaid observation, this writ petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (GOUTAM BHADURI) JUDGE Aks