1 2025:CGHC:13263 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8005 of 2019 Deepak Kumar Mandavi S/o Sravan Kumar Mandavi Aged About 21 Years R/o House No. 105, Ward No. Majiyapar, Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Tah and District Raipur (CG). 2 - The Director Health Services, State Of Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chief Medical And Health Officer District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause title, as taken from CIS) For Petitioner : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate For State/Respondents : Ms. Mukta Tripathi, Panel Lawyer. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 20/03/2025 1. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2. This petition has been preferred under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner seeking relief of compassionate appointment by setting aside the order dated 17.09.2018 (Annexure-P/3). 3. Facts of the case, in nutshell, are that mother of the petitioner namely; Late Smt. Amrita Mandavi was working as “female health worker” at Public Health Centre, Rajnandgaon (CG). She died in harness on 10.12.2010. At that time, petitioner was minor, therefore, he could not file an application for RUKHSAR BANO Digitally signed by RUKHSAR BANO Date: 2025.03.22 16:24:00 +0530 2 grant of compassionate appointment. Petitioner attained majority on 27.10.2015, and thereafter, he filed an application for compassionate appointment on 25.01.2016 in the office of respondent No.3 but the same has been rejected vide impugned order dated 17.09.2018 (Annexure-P/3) on the ground that the application has been filed after prescribed period, against which, petitioner has filed instant petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that matter of granting compassionate appointment shall be governed by the Instructions dated 14.06.2013 (Annexure-R/1) issued by General Administration Department, Government of Chhattisgarh. He would further submit that petitioner belongs to poor family and his father was agriculturist & illiterate villager. The petitioner himself was minor when his mother died. He also had one mentally retarded elder sister, who died on 14.06.2019. He further submitted that being illiterate villagers, they were not aware about the rules for granting compassionate appointment. Respondents-department also did not inform them as per Clause 15 of the Instructions regarding compassionate appointment dated 14.06.2013 (Annexure-R/1). He further submitted that after attaining age of majority on 27.10.2015 and petitioner came to know about rules regarding grant of compassionate appointment thereafter he filed application for compassionate appointment on 25.01.2016 before the respondents-department. He would further submit that since respondent authorities themselves did not comply with the provisions of Clause 15 of the Instructions (Annexure-R/1), as such, his application could not have been rejected only on the ground of delay, therefore learned counsel submits that relief(s) sought for may be granted to the petitioner. 5. State-respondents has filed very short reply. Learned State counsel referring to its reply would submit that the petitioner filed application for grant 3 of compassionate appointment after 6 years of death of his mother. She would further submit that policy of granting compassionate appointment is to give immediate succour to the family for its requirement but petitioner himself filed application after 6 years, therefore it can be presumed that they were not in a position of financial destitution. She further submitted that it is settled proposition of law that appointment on compassionate grounds cannot be claimed as a vested right and delay in filing application itself shows that family of deceased employee was not required compassionate appointment for their survivors. Learned State counsel further submitted that since application was filed by petitioner after huge delay of 6 years, therefore rejection of claim of the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment as per the Instructions / Policy of 2013, cannot be held to be unjust or illegal, hence this petition is liable to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Undisputedly, mother of petitioner Lt. Smt. Amrita Mandavi died in harness on 10.12.2010, who was working as “family health worker” at Public Health Centre, Rajnandgaon (CG) and at that time, petitioner was said to be minor. 8. The State Government has issued Instructions (Annexure-R/1) dated 14.06.2013 for grant of compassionate appointment to the family members of the employee, who died in harness. Clause 15 of aforesaid Instructions reads thus:- “15. 7. Undisputedly, mother of petitioner Lt. Smt. Amrita Mandavi died in harness on 10.12.2010, who was working as “family health worker” at Public Health Centre, Rajnandgaon (CG) and at that time, petitioner was said to be minor. 8. The State Government has issued Instructions (Annexure-R/1) dated 14.06.2013 for grant of compassionate appointment to the family members of the employee, who died in harness. Clause 15 of aforesaid Instructions reads thus:- “15. अनुकቘኋ निनुयुሹኌ क ्ቚनियु :- (1) दिवंगत शासकीय स वंकी की कीयलय ्ቚमुख य नियሹኌतकीत अधिकीरी ቛኋरी दिवंगत शासकीय स वंकी की आቦኌ त परिरीवंरी की# अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत सबं जाकीरी एवं निरिरीत आवं - प्ቔ की ्ቚरूप (परिरीशिशा्ቖ-एकी) एक माह क अवधि मा उपल्ቓ कीरीय जाएग तथा 4 ऐस जाकीरी कीयलय की अቦኌ0ल ख मु1 सरीቦኌ2त रीख जाय ग। (2) अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत एवं आवं की ्ቚरूप सबं जाकीरी आቦኌ त परिरीवंरी की# ्ቚप्त हो# की उपरीन्त प्ቔ वंयस्की सस्य ቛኋरी अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत हो त निरिरीत ्ቚरूप मु1 आवं - प्ቔ शाቈኋनितशाቈኋ अधिकीतमु नु माह क भीर उस कीयलय ्ቚमुख की# ्ቚस्तत निकीय जाएग, जिजास कीयलय मु1 दिवंगत शासकीय स वंकी अप मु:त्य की प<वं कीयरीत था। कीयलय ቛኋरी आवं - प्ቔ की पवंत आवं की की# = जाएग। (3) आवं - प्ቔ मु1 = गई जाकीरी की असरी आवं की की अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत हो त प्ቔत की परी2ण कीयलय ቛኋरी निकीय जाएग। आवं की की आय की गण आवं -प्ቔ ्ቚस्तत कीरी की नितशिथा की आरी परी की जाएग। (4) परिरीवंरी मु1 अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत की शिलए की#ई प्ቔ वंयस्की सस्य हो# परी सबंधित कीयलय ्ቚमुख ቛኋरी तशाय की स<च निवं0गध्य2 कीयलय की# अनिवंलबं = जाएग एवं तBसबं प्ቔ की ्ቚनितशिलनिप परिरीवंरी की मुखिखय की# = जाय ग। (5) आवं - प्ቔ मु1 अप<ण जाकीरी हो# अथावं उसकी सथा आवंश्यकी स्तवं जा सलग् हो# की आरी परी कीयलय ቛኋरी आवं ्ቚप्त कीरी स इंकीरी होG निकीय जाय ग, एवं आवं की की# पवंत = जाएग। कीयलय ቛኋरी आवं - प्ቔ की नियमुसरी परी2ण निकीय जाकीरी उसमु1 पई गई कीधिमुयH स आवं की की# पजाकी: त प्ቔ ቛኋरी स<शिचत निकीय जाकीरी कीधिमुयH की प<ቔኌतJ कीरी हो त समुय- समु = जाएग। निरिरीत समुय- समु मु1 आवं की स जाकीरी ्ቚप्त हो# परी उस पK रीजिजास्ट्ቑ ्ቑकी स स्मुरीण कीरीय जाय ग। यदि आवं की ቛኋरी कीधिमुयH की प<ቔኌतJ हो त अनितरिरीत समुय की मुNग की जाए त# उस अनितरिरीत समुय दिय जाएग। (6) आवं की यदि नियमुसरी अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत हो त प्ቔ हो# त# उस यथाशाቈኋ अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत की कीयवंहो की जाय ग। इंस सबं मु1 कीयलय ्ቚमुख ቛኋरी निरिरीत परिरीशिशा्ቖ - चरी मु1 ्ቚमुणकीरीण निकीय जाकीरी अቦኌ0ल ख सरिरीत निकीय जाएग। (7) अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत यथास्ቛवं उस निवं0ग य कीयलय मु1 = जावं ग, जिजासमु1 दिवंगत शासकीय स वंकी नि की प<वं कीयरीत था। कीयलय मु1 अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत हो त की#ई रिरीत प उपल्ቓ हो# परी अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत की आवं - प्ቔ स्तबं्ቍ होG निकीय जाएग अनिपत उस ्ቚनिQय मु जाकीरी आ गमु कीयवंहो हो त निवं0गध्य2 कीयलय की# ्ቚ निRत निकीय जाएग। (8) यदि दिवंगत शासकीय स वंकी की निवंवं पत् ቛኋरी स्वंय की अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत हो त असहोमुनित ्ቤत कीरीत हुए उसकी ቝኋ परी परिरीवंरी की अवंयस्की सस्य की# वंयस्की हो# परी अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत की मुग की जाए त# निय#त ቛኋरी इंस सबं मु1 निवंवं पत् स अतरिरीमु आवं - प्ቔ ्ቚप्त निकीय जाय ग तथा अवंयस्की सस्य की वंयस्की हो# परी उस उसकी शाV2ቦኌणकी य#ग्यत की आरी परी त:तय/ चतथा ण की प परी अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत की कीरीवंई की जाएग। (9) निवं0गध्य2 कीयलय की# अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत की आवं प्ቔ अቇኔ निRत हो#कीरी ्ቚप्त हो# परी, निवं0गध्य2 कीयलय ቛኋरी उसकी कीयलय अथावं अቝኋ कीयलय मु1 5 अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत हो त रिरीत प उपल्ቓ हो# की असरी अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत की कीयवंहो की जाएग तथा आवं की की# अवंगत कीरीय जाय ग। आवं की ቛኋरी अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत हो त असहोमुनित ्ቤत निकीए जा की शा मु1 परिरीሹኌቝኋनितयH परी समुयकी रूप स निवंचरी निकीय जाकीरी यथा#शिचत निणय शिलय जाय ग। (10) निवं0गध्य2 अथावं उसकी अቝኋ कीयलयH मु1 अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत की शिलए रिरीत प उपल्ቓ हो# की ሹኌቝኋनित मु1, निवं0गध्य2 तशाय की ्ቚमुण प्ቔ की सथा अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत की आवं - प्ቔ सबंधित जिजाल कील टरी की# अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत की आगमु कीरीवंई हो त अቇኔ निRत निकीय जाय ग एवं उसकी स<च आवं की की# = जाएग। (11) कील टरी कीयलय मु1 आवं प्ቔ अቇኔ निRत हो#कीरी ्ቚप्त हो# परी, जिजाल कील टरी, ቛኋरी उसकी जिजाल मु1 उसकी अቝኋ कीयलय मु1 अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत हो त रिरीत उपल्ቓ प परी अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत ्ቚ कीरी की कीरीवंई की जाय ग। जिजाल मु1 निकीस 0 कीयलय मु1 अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत हो त रिरीत प उपल्ቓ हो# परी जिजाल कील टरी तशाय की ्ቚमुण-प्ቔ की सथा आवं की की अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत की आवं - प्ቔ दिवंगत शासकीय स वंकी की ्ቚशासकीय निवं0ग की मुध्यमु स समुन्य ्ቚशास निवं0ग की# ्ቚ निRत कीरी ग एवं आवं की की# उसकी स<च = जाएग। (12) अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत की आवं H की निपटरी हो त ऐस आवं कीH की एकी स<च सबंधित कीयलय / निवं0गध्य2 कीयलय / जिजाल कील टरी कीयलय मु1 सरिरीत की जाएग। ऐस स<च दिवंगत शासकीय स वंकी की मु:त्य की नित शिथा की Qमुसरी हो#ग। जा# शासकी य स वंकी पहोल दिवंगत हुआ हो#. उसकी आቦኌ त की# पहोल अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत = जाएग। (13) अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत की आ शा जारी कीरी की प<वं कीयलय ्ቚमुख ቛኋरी आवं की स परिरशि्ቖ - दो मु1 निरिरीत ्ቚरूप मु1 दिवंगत शासकीय स वंकी की परिरीवंरी की अन्य सस्यH की समुशिचत 0रीण- प#Rण कीरी की सबं मु1 घो#Rण- प्ቔ 0रीवंकीरी ्ቚप्त निकीय जाय ग। घो#Rण- प्ቔ की उल्लघो कीरी की सबं मु1 परिरीवंरी की आቦኌ त सस्य / सस्यH ቛኋरी की गई शिशाकीयत ्ቚमुቦኌणत पई जा परी अकीቘኋ नियሹኌत निकीस 0 समुय समुप्त की जा सकी ग।" 9. Perusal of aforesaid Clause 15 (1), (2), (4) & (8) shows that liability has been vested upon the head of the department / appointing authority, where deceased employee was working, to inform his/her family with regard to grant of compassionate appointment along with supplying copy of application in prescribed format within 1 month, thereafter within 3 months family members of the deceased employee are required to be filed appropriate application in prescribed format. But in instant case, nothing has been stated by 6 respondents in their reply that after death of Lt. Smt. Amrita Mandavi, whether Clause 15 (1) was complied with by the respondents- department or not. 10. As stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is poor resident of village, husband of deceased employee was agriculturist and illiterate also. The petitioner himself was minor at the time of death of his mother and his elder sister is said to be mentally retarded, who died also in the year 2019. Petitioner attained age of majority on 27.10.2015 and he filed application on 25.01.2016 (Annexure-P/1) for grant of compassionate appointment i.e. within three months after attaining age of majority. 11. Having considered aforesaid facts, particularly the circumstances of the petitioner & his family and further considering the fact that respondent authorities themselves did not comply with the provision of Clause 15 (1) and other provisions contemplated in Clause 15, therefore, they ought not have rejected the application of petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment. 12. In view of above discussion, I feel inclined to allow the instant petition. The impugned order dated 17.09.2018 (Annexure-P/3) is set aside/quashed and respondent authorities are directed to consider and decide the application of the petitioner (Annexure-P/1) for grant of compassionate appointment in accordance with the Instructions (Annexure-R/1) dated 14.06.2013, within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt/submission of a copy of this order. 13. Accordingly, this writ petition stands allowed. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) JUDGE Rukhsar