1 2026:CGHC:7748 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 858 of 2020 Shamsher Khan, S/o. Late Md. Jahiuddin Khan, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Village Begdai, Post Office Dongargao, Police Station Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Water Resources Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Chief Executive Officer, Water Resources Department, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Deputy Director Water, Weather Department, Region No. – 04, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 – Collector, Gariyaband, District- Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Sudhanshu Singh, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Govt. Advocate ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2026.02.12 14:40:38 +0530 2 (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 12.02.2026 1. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 08.01.2020, whereby the petitioner’s application for grant of compassionate appointment has been rejected only on the ground that his name has not been entered into the government record (service book). 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that mainly because the name of the petitioner has not been entered in the service book of the deceased, his application for compassionate appointment has been rejected, which is illegal and bad in law. 3. Learned State counsel would support the impugned order passed by the respondent authorities and submit that the petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents meticulously. 5. The petitioner’s application has been rejected solely on the ground that his name has not been entered into the service record of the 3 deceased. However, the competent authority was required to proceed in accordance with law. If the petitioner comes under the definition of family, as defined under the policy of the State Government, the case of the petitioner has to be considered in accordance with the policy. 6. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 08.01.2020 is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the competent authority to decide the case of the petitioner afresh in accordance with the policy of the State Government. However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case and the competent authority shall decide the case of the petitioner, on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law. 7. In view of the above, this writ petition is allowed. No cost. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Ashok Judge