1 CGHC010298392019 2026:CGHC:31776 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7068 of 2019 Sunil Deep, S/o. Late Shri Vidya Dhar Deep, Aged About 35 Years, R/o. House No. 01, Block No. 03, BSUP Colony, Subhash Nagar, Telibandha Raipur, Tehsil And District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Water Resource Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Tahsil And District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Pin 492002. 2 - Chief Engineer, Mahanadi Pariyojana, Water Resource Department, Tehsil And District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Superintending Engineer, Mahanadi Mandal, Water Resource Department Raipur, Tehsil And District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Executive Engineer, Mahanadi Jalashay Pariyojan, Water Resource Department Raipur, Tehsil And District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Vaibhav P. Shukla, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, Panel Lawyer ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2026.07.25 14:27:58 +0530 2 (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 24.07.2026 1. The petitioner has questioned the order dated 03.08.2019, passed by the respondent No.2, by which the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment has been rejected. 2. Mr. Vaibhav P. Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the impugned order is unsustainable and bad in law, therefore, it is liable to be set aside. He would rely upon the decision of this Court passed in WPS No.5857 of 2021 (Ghanshyam Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others). 3. Mr. Pranjal Shukla, learned State counsel, would support the impugned order and submit that the Supreme Court in the matter of N.C.Santhosh v. State of Karnataka & Others1 followed in State of Himachal Pradesh & Others v. Abhishek Kumar2 has clearly held that the norms prevailing on the date of consideration of the application should be the basis for consideration of claim for compassionate appointment. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the pleadings and the documents appended thereto. 1 (2020) 7 SCC 617 2 (2024) 5 SCC 280 3 5. The impugned order clearly states that if prior to the death of a Government servant, any member of his/her family is already employed in Government service, no other family member shall be appointed on compassionate grounds. Admittedly, the petitioner’s mother is already in Government service and, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for compassionate appointment. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in this petition, the same deserves to be and hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ashok