1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6660 of 2021 1 - Purendra Kumar Yadav Son Of Late Shri Bihari Lal Yadav Aged About 31 Years Resident Of Chikhli Rajput Gali Ward No. 5 Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - District Education Officer Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ---- Respondents For petitioner : Mr. Barun Chakraborty, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate For State : Mr. Rajkumar Gupta, Additional A.G. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 12.08.2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking following relief (s) : “(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash Annexure P-1 and direct the respondent authority to consider and grant compassionate appointment in the interest of justice. (ii) Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.” 2. Mr. Chakraborty, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that father of the petitioner namely, Biharilal Yadav was working on the post of Head Master at Government Middle School, Khaprikala Block and District Rajnandgaon. He died in REKHA SINGH -2- harness on 06.06.2018. He would further submit that the petitioner moved an application for compassionate appointment on 29.08.2018 and same has been rejected by respondent No.2 vide order dated 08.02.2021 on the ground that on the date of death of father of the petitioner, his elder brother namely, Bhupendra Kumar Yadav was posted as Hostel Superintendent at Pre-Matric Scheduled Tribe Boys Hostel at Bakarkatta, District Rajandgaon. He would further contend that elder brother of the petitioner tendered his resignation on 31.08.2018 and on the date of consideration, no one was in Government service, therefore, Clause 6A of the Policy for compassionate appointment dated 14.06.2013 would not attract. He would pray to quash the order Annexure P/1 dated 08.02.2021. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Gupta, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State/respondents would oppose the submissions. He would submit that on 06.06.2018, when father of the petitioner died, the brother of the petitioner namely, Bhupendra Kumar Yadav was in Government service. He would further submit that the application was submitted by the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment on 29.08.2018 and on said date also, his elder brother was in service, therefore, respondent No.2 rightly rejected the application moved by the petitioner. He would contend that the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record. 5. The father of the petitioner died on 06.06.2018; application was 3 moved by the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment on 29.08.2018; brother of the petitioner tendered his resignation on 31.08.2018, whereas, application moved by the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment was rejected by respondent No.2 on 08.02.2021 and thus on the date of consideration, no one from deceased family was in Government service, therefore, order dated 08.02.2021 vide Annexure P/1 is not sustainable in the eyes of law and accordingly quashed. The matter is remitted back to the respondent No.2 to consider the claim of the petitioner afresh and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law preferably within a period of 120 days. 6. With the aforesaid observation(s)/direction(s), the present petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha