1 CGHC010345062022 2026:CGHC:30655 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7755 of 2022 1 - Gaurav Singh S/o Shri Kalyan Singh Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Kumhali, Post Amaguda (Markel), Tahsil Jagdalpur, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Department Of Education Mantralaya, Vill. Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - District Education Officer Jagdalpur, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh 3 - Block Education Officer Jagdalpur, Block Officer-Jagdalpur, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh 4 - Head Master Primary School, Kumhali, Tahsil- Jagdalpur, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Shri Keshav Dewangan, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Ajay Kumrani, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 20.07.2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs: NIRMALA RAO 2 “10.1 To call for the records of the case for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.2 To issue an appropriate writ or order and quash the order dated 31.03.2021 (Annuxure P/5) 15.09.2022 (Annexure P/7) passed by res. no. 2. 10.3 To issue an appropriate writ or order and declared the order dated 31.03.2021 (Annuxure P/5) and 15.09.2022 (Annexure P/7) are null and void. 10.4 To issued an appropriate writ and order and directed res. no. 2 to grant the compassionate appointment to the petitioner within stipulated period. 10.5 Any other relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted.” 2. The facts, in brief, are that the petitioner has claimed compassionate appointment on the basis of an adoption deed. It is pleaded that the petitioner was adopted by late Smt. Lata Pawar, who was working as Headmaster at Primary School Kumhali, Jagdalpur, District Bastar. The Competent Authority rejected the application moved by the petitioner for the first time on 31.3.2021 on the ground that the petitioner was not entitled to compassionate appointment under the policy, as he was the nephew of the deceased government servant. Subsequently, claim of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that he failed to produce the relevant documents in support of the adoption deed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it is undisputed fact that the petitioner is the nephew of the deceased government servant and an adoption deed was executed in his favour on 29.1.2016. Being the adopted son of the deceased government 3 servant, he is entitled to claim compassionate appointment. He would contend that Condition No.5.1 of the Policy of 2013 provides that an adopted son is one of the dependents eligible to apply for compassionate appointment. It is argued that the reasons assigned by the respondent authorities while rejecting the application of the petitioner are erroneous. He would pray to allow this petition. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that the petitioner failed to establish valid adoption according to Sections 6 & 8 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. He would submit that the petitioner produced only an unregistered adoption deed before the authority concerned, which was not found to be sufficient by the authorities and therefore, the application moved by the petitioner was rightly rejected. He would contend that the petition is misconceived and deserves to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on record. 6. Admittedly, Smt. Lata Pawar, who was working on the post of Headmaster at Primary School, Kumhali, Jagdalpur, District Bastar died in harness on 18.2.2019. The petitioner, who is the nephew of the deceased government servant, applied for grant of compassionate appointment. An adoption deed was produced before the respondent authorities; however, in the absence of any supporting documents, his claim was rejected. It was also observed by the respondent authorities that a nephew of a deceased government servant is not entitled to claim compassionate appointment under the policy. Although 4 Condition No.5.1 of the Policy of 2013 provides that an adopted son or daughter can apply for grant of compassionate appointment but at the same time, such dependant must establish that he or she is the legally adopted son or daughter of the deceased government servant. The claimant is required to prove the validity of the adoption strictly in accordance with Sections 6 & 8 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. 7. In the present case though an adoption deed was produced before the Competent Authority, but mere submission of such a document is not sufficient to establish a valid adoption. The petitioner ought to have approached the Competent Civil Court seeking relief of declaration to that effect and in absence of such supporting document, the authorities concerned rightly rejected the application moved by the petitioner, particularly when adoption deed is an unregistered document. Therefore, I do not find any good ground to interfere in the matter. 8. Accordingly, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi