Shubham Agrawal v. Registrar

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 5801 of 2021 Shubham Agrawal S/o Late Nirmal Kumar Agrawal, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Q. No.- H/23, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University Compound Raipur, Police Station Saraswati Nagar, Tahsil And District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Mo. No.- 9893886083 ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Registrar, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. Superintendent, Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Ratnesh Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For Respondents :

Mr. Neeraj Choubey, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 01.11.2021

1. The relief sought by the petitioner in the present writ petition is for a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the application for compassionate appointment.

2. The father of the petitioner is said to have been working under the respondent no.1 on the post of Junior Superintendent (Exam Department). The father of petitioner died due to Corona virus on 09.04.2021. Thereafter the petitioner moved an application for compassionate appointment which till date has not been decided.

3. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the claim of petitioner has not been refused by the respondents. The respondents have only asked the petitioner to produce succession certificate so as to be sure that the petitioner in fact is the son of the deceased employee. He submits that the moment the petitioner produces succession certificate, the claim of petitioner for compassionate appointment shall be immediately processed and an appropriate decision shall be taken at the earliest. Counsel for the respondents further submits that the reason why they have insisted in getting the succession certificate is that the entire death-cum-retiral dues has been claimed by one Rajesh Agrawal who is said to be the younger brother of the deceased employee and therefore, the respondent no.

1 has serious doubts so far as the succession of the petitioner is concerned. The contention of the respondents also is that the receiving of entire money by the brother of the deceased employee has also not been opposed by the petitioner at any point of time which also raises a great element of doubt.

4. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the statement made by the counsel for the respondents that subject to the petitioner submitting succession certificate his claim shall be immediately processed and decided in accordance with the policy of the compassionate appointment, the writ petition at this juncture stands disposed of permitting the petitioner to produce the succession certificate before the respondent no.1 at the earliest. The moment the succession certificate is produced before the respondents, the claim of petitioner shall be processed and finalised at the earliest preferably

within a period of 90 days from the date of submission of the succession certificate.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Khatai