1 2025:CGHC:35807 NAFR HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2582 of 2021 Ku. Rani Nishad D/o Panchu Ram Nishad Aged About 24 Years R/o. Village Banbhedi, Tahsil Dongergaon, District Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh), District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1- State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2- Collector Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. 3- Sub Divisional officer (Revenue) Dongergaon, District Rajnandgaon, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. 4- Tahsildar Dongergaon, District Rajnandgaon, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pramod Ramteke, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Topilal Bareth, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 24/07/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order, direction and quash the impugned order dated 25-07-2019 (Annexure P-1). 2 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order, direction to direct the respondent authorities to issue compensation of Rs.4 lakhs without stipulated time bound period. 10.3 Any appropriate writ, direction or order may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case.” 2. Mr. Ramteke, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the mother of the petitioner, namely Smt. Indira Bai Nishad died on 16.05.2017 as she fell into a septic tank. He would further submit that an application was submitted before respondent No.4 on 08.07.2019, claiming compensation in accordance with the circular issued by the State Government dated 09.06.2015. He would contend that, according to the aforesaid circular, the legal representatives of the deceased person, in cases of death by drowning or accident in a river, dam, pond, well, water stream, or canal, are entitled to compensation to the tune of Rs. 4 lakhs. He would also submit that the application filed by the petitioner was forwarded to the Sub-Divisional Officer on 08.07.2019, and thereafter, to the Collector on 15.07.2019. He would contend that respondent No. 2 dismissed the petitioner’s claim vide order dated 25.07.2019. He would further contend that, as per the said circular, the petitioner is entitled to compensation, and the respondent authorities 3 have committed an error of law in rejecting the claim; thus, the order dated 25.07.2019 (Annexure P/1) may be set aside. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner and would submit that the petitioner's mother died as she fell into a septic tank, and such an accident is not covered under the circular dated 09.06.2015. He would further submit that respondent No.2, after due consideration, rightly rejected the application submitted by the petitioner. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed in the file. 5. Clause 5(1) of the Revenue Book Circular 6(4) dated 09.06.2015 does not provide for financial assistance in the event of a death caused by falling into a septic tank. The circular contemplates financial assistance in case of loss of life due to natural calamities, drowning, or death caused by snake bite or scorpion bite occurring in a river, pond, well, or dam. In such cases, the dependents of the deceased are entitled to receive a compensation of Rs. 4 lakhs, but in the present case, the petitioner's mother died as she fell down into the septic tank of her house and such a death is not covered under Clause 5(1) of the circular dated 09.06.2015, therefore, the application moved by the petitioner was rightly rejected by the Joint Collector, Rajnandgaon, vide order dated 25.07.2019. 4 6. Taking into consideration the reasons assigned in the order dated 25.07.2019 (Annexure P/1), and the contents of the circular dated 09.06.2015, this Court does not find any good ground to interfere with the order impugned. 7. Accordingly, the petition is hereby dismissed at the admission stage itself. No cost(s). Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE NADIM