1 2025:CGHC:34498 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6139 of 2021 1 - Smt. Jyoti Gabel W/o Late Shri Dr. Yogesh Gobel, Aged About 29 Years R/o Imliduggu, House No. 677, Opposite To Santoshi Mandir, Main Byapsaa Road, Imliduggu, Ward No. 8, Korba, P.S. And District Korba Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh The Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Department, Mantralay, Raipur, Naya Raipur, Civil And Rev. District Raipur- Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Collector, Bijapur, District-Bijapur Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Director, Health Services, Health And Family Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattiagarh. 4 - The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Bijapur, Post And District Bijapur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Shri Vikas Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, Addl.A.G. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 21.07.2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs:- “10.1 To call for the records of the case for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.2 To issue an appropriate writ or order and direct the respondents to issue succession certificate immediately. 10.3 To issue an appropriate writ or order and direct the respondents to consider the marriage certificate of the petitioner and on that basis issue compassionate appointment to petitioner. SMT NIRMALA RAO 2 10.4 Any other relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the husband of the petitioner was a doctor posted at District Hospital, Bijapur, who died in harness on 25.8.2020, whereas the marriage was solemnized on 9.6.2020. He would contend that the petitioner moved an application for compassionate appointment on 17.9.2020, but the same has not been considered and decided till date. He would further submit that the respondent authorities have directed the petitioner to submit a succession certificate. It is further contended that according to the law laid down in the matter of Piyush Kumar Anchal vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others, WPS No.1034 of 2022, vide order dated 7.3.2022, the provisions of Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short ‘the Act, 1925’) would not apply. It is also contended that the petitioner is the wife of the deceased and is therefore entitled to a compassionate appointment. However, the respondent authorities have rejected the application moved by the petitioner without considering the above-stated facts. He would also contend that for the grant of compassionate appointment, there is no requirement to submit a succession certificate, and the application ought to have been decided strictly in accordance with the policy governing the compassionate appointment. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that since the marriage of the petitioner was solemnized on 9.6.2020, her name was not entered in the service records, and therefore, a direction 3 was issued to the petitioner to submit a succession certificate to ascertain the correct facts with regard to her entitlement. 4. Heard. 5. Considering the fact that the respondent authorities have directed the petitioner to submit a succession certificate, in my considered opinion, such a direction is not sustainable. In the matter relating to the compassionate appointment, such a requirement cannot be imposed, and the application should be decided strictly in accordance with the applicable policy. 6. Taking into consideration the fact that the provisions of Section 372 of the Act, 1925, do not apply to matters concerning compassionate appointment, the direction issued to the petitioner to submit a succession certificate is hereby quashed. The respondent authorities are directed to consider the claim of the petitioner strictly in accordance with the applicable policy, preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, the respondents shall be at liberty to inquire as to whether the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the deceased before taking a final decision. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 90 days. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi