Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 1024 (CHH)

ANAMIKA NETAM v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/33/2025 · 2025-01-08

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:1058 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 33 of 2025 Anamika Netam D/o Shri Gautam Netam Aged About 30 Years R/o Paras Nagar Sector - 2 Kasdol P.S. And Tah. Kasdol District - Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Medical And Health Department Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur Tah. And District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Chief Medical And Health Officer Medical And Health Department District - Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.) 3 - Block Medical Officer Medical And Health Department Lawan District - Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate For Respondents/State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 08.01.2025 1. Heard Mr. Ravindra Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Nupur Trivedi, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/respondents. YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2025.01.08 19:09:07 +0530 2 2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following relief(s):- “10.1 It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of MANDAMUS directing the respondent No.2 & 3 to consider and decide the application for compassionate appointment made by the petitioner as early as this Hon’ble Court directs. 10.2 It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue any writ or direction or order as deem fit in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of death of mother of the petitioner, she has applied for compassionate appointment on 23.03.2021, however, even after expiry of four years, the application has not been considered and decided by the respondent authorities till date though the petitioner has made several reminders for consideration of her application for compassionate appointment. 4. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, submits that respondent authorities will decide the application of the petitioner within the time frame granted by this Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available with the writ petition. 3 6. Be that as it may, the respondent authorities are directed to consider the application of the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment within a period of “4 weeks” as the said application is pending since 23.03.2021. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observations/directions. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh