1 WPS No. 1694 of 2017 2025:CGHC:5068 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1694 of 2017  Ku. Anamika Singh D/o Late Shri Arun Singh, aged about 24 years, Occupation unemployed, R/o Vasundhara Colony, Godhanpur, Post Funduldihari, P. S. Gandhi Nagar (Ambikapur) District Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1. The State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Panchayat and Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Collector, District Balrampur, Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 3. Engineer in Chief, Rural Engineering Service, Development Commissioner, Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4. Executive Engineer, Department of Rural Engineering Service, Division No. 2, Ramanujganj District Balrampur Chhattisgarh. 5. Collector, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner :- Mr. A.N. Bhakta, Advocate. For State-Respondents :- Mr. Sharad Mishra, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Date: 2025.01.30 16:14:47 +0530 2 WPS No. 1694 of 2017 28/01/2025 1. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition calling in question legality, validity and correctness of the impugned order dated 11.05.2015 whereby the petitioner’s application for companssionate appointment on account of her father’s death has been rejected. 2. Mr. A.N. Bhakta, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment has been rejected on the ground of technical reasons that the petitioner has filed the application for compassionate appointment after a period of two years whereas, the petitioner has filed her application as per Circular dated 02.02.2006 (Annexure P/19) within a period of six months from the date of death of her father as her father was died on 19.04.2010, therefore, the instant writ petiton deserves to be allowed and the petitioner is entitled for compassionate appointment. 3. Mr. Sharad Mishra, learned State counsel, would submit that the petitioner’s father has died on 19.04.2010 and the petitioner had filed her application for compassionate appointment on 08.06.2012 after two years from the date of death of her father, therefore, her application has rightly 3 WPS No. 1694 of 2017 been rejected as per Circular dated 02.02.2006. Even otherwise, the petitioner has been able to survive for a fairly long time and since the appointment on compassionate basis is not a regular appointment, it would be inappropriate to consider the petitioner’s application for appointment on compassionate ground, at this stage. Therefore, the instant writ petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein in above and gone through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner’s father died in harness on 19.04.2010 and the petitioner has filed application for compassionate appointment on 08.06.2012 with delay of 2 years after qualifying class 12th examination and the same was rejected by the impugned order dated 11.05.2015. However, the whole object of the Compassionate Appointment Scheme is to give succor to the family to tide over the sudden financial crisis be fallen upon the dependents on account of the untimely demise of its sole earning member. In the case at hand, the petitioner’s family has survived for a fairly long time, therefore, it would be 4 WPS No. 1694 of 2017 inappropriate to grant compassionate appointment to the petitioner after 15 years of death of her father as her father was died on 19.04.2010. [See :- Haryana State Electricity Board and another v. Hakim Singh 1 ; & State of Jammu & Kashmir and others v. Sajad Ahmed Mir 2 ]. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own cost(s). Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ankit 1 (1997) 8 SCC 85 2 (2006) 5 SCC 766