1 2025:CGHC:54055 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 12582 of 2025 • Purnank Dongare, S/o Late Shri Bhushan Prasad Dongare, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Ward No.20, Road Mohalla, Village Koshnanda, P.S. Champa, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Director, Directorate Of Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3. Joint Director, Education Division, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 4. Collector, Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 5. District Education Officer Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 6. Block Education Officer Kartala, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal, Advocate appears through Video Conferencing. For State/Respondents : Ms. Akansha Verma Dabhadekar, P.L. DEEPTI JHA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 06/11/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition assailing the order dated 03.09.2025 (Annexure-P/1), whereby the claim of the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment has been rejected on the ground that his mother is already in Government Service. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the order impugned passed by respondent No.5 is bad in law, as the petitioner’s mother has already solemnized a subsequent marriage after the death of the petitioner’s father. He further submits that the petitioner is not residing with his mother, but with his grandmother. As per the Policy and Scheme of the compassionate appointment framed by the State Government, dependent family members of a deceased government servant, who dies in harness, are eligible for compassionate appointment. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the order impugned be quashed. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner and submits that this issue with regard to the compassionate appointment has already been taken into consideration by the Full Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.06.2023 passed in the matter of State of Chhattisgarh & Others Versus Umesh Thakur (WA No.236/2022), whereby it has been held that compassionate appointment has to be granted in accordance with the policy applicable and where the policy applicable for compassionate appointment clearly indicates that where one of the family members of the deceased Government servant is already in Government service, then other members of the family of the deceased Government servant would not be entitled for compassionate appointment. Hence, the order impugned does not call for any interference of this Court. 3 4. In view of the above submission made by the parties and the aforesaid judgment passed by the Full Bench of this Court in Umesh Thakur (supra), I am of the view that there is no perversity or illegality in the impugned order dated 03.09.2025 (Annexure-P/1), which does not call for any interference of this Court. 5. For the foregoing, the instant petition is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge