Kanti Kumar Sharma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1234 of 2021 Kanti Kumar Sharma S/o Late Har Prasad Sharma Aged About 49 Years R/o Sakin Jarve (B) Thana And Tehsil Baloda, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development , Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2.

Chief Executive Officer (C.E.O.) Zila Panchayat Janjgir Champa, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 3.

Chief Executive Officer (C.E.O.) Janpad Panchayat Baloda , District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 4.

Collector Janjgir Champa District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, Advocate For State :

Mr. Alok Buxy, Addl. Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 23/03/2021 1.

The present writ petition has been filed challenging the action on the part of the respondents rejecting the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment.

2.

Perusal of the pleadings clearly reflect that the petitioner has sought employment from the respondents in the capacity of the brother of the deceased employee. The petitioner herein from the pleading itself clearly shows that he is a person who is aged more than 48-49 years of age.

3.

Given the fact that he is more than 45 years of age, the petitioner undisputedly has crossed the upper age limit with which he could have been considered for employment and the petitioner on this ground alone would become dis-entitled for compassionate appointment under the respondents.

4.

As such this Court does not find any strong case made out by the petitioner calling for an interference with the impugned order. However, in case if the petitioner wants to approach the authorities on the administrative side for taking any sympathetic consideration, it would always be open for the petitioner to approach the respondent authorities for ventilating his grievance. 5.

With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved