Gopi Dongre v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5228 of 2019 Gopi Dongre S/o Shri Bharat Dongre Aged About 43 Years R/o Ward No. 2, Itwari Bazar, Naya Baradwar, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Ministry Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. The Director Directorate Of Urban Administration And Development, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Joint Director Urban Administration And Development, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

4. Chief Municipal Officer Nagar Panchayat Naya Baradwar, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.

5. Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat Sariya, District Janjgir- Champa Chhattisgarh

6. Chief Municipal Officer Nagar, Panchayat Kota, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh Advocate For State :

Mr. Sameer Behar, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 17/07/2019 1.

The relief sought for by the petitioner in the present writ petition is for an appropriate direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment.

2.

According to the petitioner, his mother Late Smt. Sushila Dongre who was working as class IV employee under the respondent No. 4 and who died in harness on 25.07.2015. The petitioner immediately thereafter had raised a claim for compassionate appointment on account of lack of vacancies. The claim for compassionate appointment was thereafter ordered to be processed under the respondent No. 5 as per Annexure P/1 dated 09.01.2018 wherein the respondent No. 3 had directed the respondent No. 5

-2to process the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment. However, subsequently, because of non-availability of vacant post respondent No. 2 issued a fresh order to the respondent No. 6 to consider the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment vide letter dated 09.07.2018.

3.

The counsel for the petitioner submits that in spite of repeated letter being made by the respondent No. 2 to the respondent No. 6, no further development has taken place. Meanwhile, the respondent No. 5 has transferred the entire files along with documents in respect of the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment to the office of the respondent No. 6. 4.

Given the aforesaid limited grievance that the petitioner has that his claim has not yet been decided, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would meet if the writ petition is disposed off with a direction to the respondent No. 2 and 6 to ensure that an appropriate decision is taken at the earliest on the Petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment. 5.

Let the respondent No. 2 & 6 take an appropriate decision within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6.

The writ petition accordingly stands disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Jyotijha