Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 19975 (CHH)

KU. KAKOLI ROY v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/6446/2021 · 2026-05-07

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Public Interest Litigationbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:21613 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6446 of 2021  Ku. Kakoli Roy D/o Shri Ajit Kumar Roy Aged About 53 Years R/o Railway Colony, Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Director/deputy Director Directorate Of Chhattisgarh Public Instruction, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. Collector Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4. District Education Officer District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For State : Mr. Topilal Bareth, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 8.5.2026 1) By way of this petition, petitioner has sought following reliefs:- (i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash and set-aside the impugned Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.05.08 14:14:11 +0530 2 order dated 21.10.2021 (Annexure P-1) passed by the respondent no. 4, in the interest of justice. (ii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to strictly decide the claim as well as representation of the petitioner and pass order for appointment on the compassionate basis within stipulated time, in the interest of justice. (iii) Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that brother of petitioner namely Sujit Roy who was working on the post of Assistant Teacher under respondent department died in harness on 16.4.2021. He further submits that petitioner who is the unmarried sister of deceased government servant moved application for grant of compassionate appointment on 14.7.2021 but same has been rejected by District Education Officer, Bilaspur vide order dated 21.10.2021 on the ground that age of petitioner on date of consideration was more than 45 years and she was lacking the requisite qualifications for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher. He contends that respondent authorities ought to have relaxed the age criteria while considering the claim of petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment. He further contends that respondent authorities ought to have afforded opportunity to petitioner to acquire the required qualifications for appointment. He prays to allow this petition. 3) On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose. He submits that petitioner lacks the education qualifications required 3 for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher and at present, she is aged around 58 years, therefore it would not be ideal to offer compassionate appointment to the petitioner. He further submits that this petition deserves to be dismissed. 4) Heard. 5) Admittedly, petitioner’s brother who was a government servant died in harness on 16.4.2021. Petitioner applied for grant of compassionate appointment on 14.7.2021 and her claim was rejected by District Education Officer, Bilaspur vide order dated 21.10.2021 on the ground that petitioner exceeded 45 years of age on the date of application. 6) It appears that petitioner is lacking the educational qualifications required for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher and presently she has attained the age of 58 years, therefore it would not be feasible to offer her compassionate appointment. 7) Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts and the reasons assigned by District Education Officer, Bilaspur in the order impugned, no case is made out for interference. Consequently, this petition stands dismissed. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a