High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/4241/2020disposed off

Amit Lakda v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2020-10-28Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4241 of 2020 • Amit Lakda S/o Late Nansai Lakda Aged About 40 Years Residence Of Village Bandhanpur (Bardand), Tahsil Patthallgaon, Police Station Baghbahar, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Water Resources Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Superintendent Engineer Shyam Barnai Project Division, Ambikapur, Sarguja, Chhattisgarh. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Basna, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh

3. Executive Engineer Water Resources Department, Jashpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

Shri CJk Rao, Advocate For State :

Ms. Akanksha Jain, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order 28.10.2020 Heard.

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the father of the petitioner while working as Assistant Garde -02 died on harness on 23.11.2018. Subsequently, as per the policy the petitioner made an application for compassionate appointment on 17.01.2019 (Annexure P-2). The limited prayer of the petitioner, at this moment, would be confined to the fact that the application for compassionate appointment of the petitioner has not yet been decide, the same may be decided within a limited period of time.

2. Perused the documents.

3. Perusal of Annexure P-1, would show that father of petitioner died on 23.11.2018 and Annexure P-2 would show that application for

compassionate appointment was made on 17.01.2019. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for consideration on his application for compassionate appointment, as it cannot be kept in abeyance for time immemorial.

4. Considering the facts, Respondent No. 2 is directed to decide the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment within a further period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. It is made clear that this Court has not observed any opinion on the right of the petitioner and the application of the petitioner shall be decided according to the existing policy of the State.

6. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Jyoti