1 2025:CGHC:36150 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3887 of 2021  Tejender Kour D/o Late Gurudayal Singh Aged About 31 Years R/o C/o Ranjeet Singh House No. 172-B, Street No. 02, Shanti Nagar, Bhiali District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2. Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarter, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3. Inspector General Of Police, Durg Range, District Durg Chhattisgarh 4. Superintendent Of Police Durg District Durg Chhattisgarh 5. Officer Incharge Of Commandant First Battalion, Central Arms Force, Bhiali Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 6. Onkar Singh Randhawa S/o Late Gurudayal Singh R/o Near Shani Mandir New Khursipar G. E. Road, Bhilai District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Punit Ruparel, Advocate For State : Mr. Pramod Shrivastava, Dy. Government Advocate For Respondent No. 6 : Mr. Amit Nayak, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 25. 07.2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant half of the SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.07.28 14:19:34 +0530 2 salary of the respondent No.6 to her (petitioner) for maintenance. OR That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to terminate the job of respondent No.6 for violation of self declared affidavit dated 21-08-2017. 10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to decide the pending representation of the petitioner dated 17.04.2021 (Annexure P/3). 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, may also, kindly be granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the father of the petitioner, namely Gurudayal Singh, who was working on the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector(ASI) in the police department, died in harness on 30.01.2017, whereas his mother died on 02.02.2017. He would further submit that respondent No. 6 moved an application for compassionate appointment, and he was granted the appointment vide order dated 14.05.2019 on the post of Constable (MT). He would also submit that the consent of the petitioner was obtained, and there was an assurance that respondent No. 6 would support other family members. He would further contend that respondent No. 6, after marriage, has refused to maintain and support the petitioner, who is his unmarried sister; therefore, a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to grant 50% of the salary of respondent No. 6 to the petitioner or in the alternative, his services may be terminated. 3. On the other hand, learned Advocates appearing for the respondents would oppose. They would submit that the appointment of respondent No. 6 was made in accordance with the rules. They would further submit that a consent letter was given by the petitioner in favour of respondent No. 6. 3 They would also submit that there is a dispute with regard to the financial transaction and property between the parties; therefore, the instant petition has been filed. They would further submit that the instant petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on the record. 5. The petitioner is the unmarried daughter of Late Gurudayal Singh. The petitioner was dependent on the income of Late Gurudayal Singh. She has no personal source of income, and when the application for compassionate appointment was moved by respondent No. 6, an undertaking was given to the effect that he would properly maintain and support other family members. The parents of the petitioner are no more. Consent was given by the petitioner on the condition that respondent No. 6 would financially support her. 6. The petitioner is the unmarried daughter of Late Gurudayal Singh, who died in harness while posted on the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) in the police department, and respondent No. 6 has been granted compassionate appointment; therefore, respondent No. 6 is under an obligation to maintain and support the petitioner financially till she gets married or secures employment. The petitioner has made a representation before the respondent authorities on 17.04.2021 (Annexure P/3), but the same has not been considered yet. Therefore, at this juncture, the instant petition is disposed of, and respondent No. 2 is directed to look into the matter and decide the pending representation of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of 90 days. 7. Respondent No. 2 shall provide the opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as to respondent No. 6. 4 8. With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), the instant petition is hereby disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant