1 CGHC010084862022 2026:CGHC:32258 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1926 of 2022 1. Ramchandra @ Ramchander S/o Late Ramsajiwan Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Pachira, Tahsil And District- Surajpur (C.G.) 2. Urmila D/o Late Ramsajiwan Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Pachira, Tahsil And District- Surajpur (C.G.) 3. Ku. Pooja D/o Late Ramsajiwan Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Pachira, Tahsil And District- Surajpur (C.G.) 4. Smt. Parwati Wd/o Late Ramsajiwan Aged About 54 Years R/o Village Pachira, Tahsil And District- Surajpur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Through- The Chairman-Cum- Managing Director, Seepat Road, Bilaspur (C.G.) 2. The General Manager Secl, Bishrampur Area, Tahsil And District- Surajpur (C.G.) 3. The Deputy Manager (Personnel) Rehar Gayatri Ketki Sub Area S.E.C.L. Bishrampur Area District- Surajpur (C.G.) 4. Smt. Gomti W/o Late Ramsajiwan Aged About 56 Years So Called Wife Of Late Ramsajiwan R/o Chopda Colony Bishrampur, Tahsil And District- Surajpur (C.G.) 5. Santosh Kumar S/o Late Ramsajiwan Aged About 37 Years R/o Chopda Colony Bishrampur, Tahsil And District- Surajpur (C.G.) 6. Sushma D/o Late Ramsajiwan Aged About 35 Years R/o Chopda Colony Bishrampur, Tahsil And District- Surajpur (C.G.) 7. Ashok Kumar S/o Late Ramsajiwan Aged About 33 Years R/o Chopda Colony Bishrampur, Tahsil And District- Surajpur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) 2 For Petitioners : Mr. Ashok Kumar Shukla, Adv. along with Mr. Shivam Mishra, Adv. For Respondents No. 1 to 3 : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Adv. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 28.7.2026 1) By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought following reliefs:- 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus/certiorari or of like nature to quash the impugned order dated 27/01/2022 (Annexure P/1) with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the application of the petitioners for compassionate appointment on merits in accordance with the policy by speaking order in an objective manner within stipulated period. 10.2 That, a command/direction may kindly be issued to the respondents to produce the entire record pertaining to the case of the petitioners and a further direction may kindly be issued to the respondents for taking the necessary steps for redressal of the grievances of the petitioners. 10.3 Any other relief which is deemed fit and proper may also be awarded to the petitioners along with the cost of the petition. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Late Ramsajiwan, who was working on the post of Head Chainman under S.E.C.L. died in harness on 30.12.2007 and petitioners No. 1 to 3 are his children whereas petitioner No. 4 is his widow. He further submits that petitioner No. 1 moved application for grant of dependent employment on 5.1.2022 but till date no decision has been taken. He also submits that respondent authorities are under obligation to decide the application therefore a direction may be issued to 3 the respondent authorities to decide the application for grant of dependent employment at the earliest. 3) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1 to 3 would oppose. He submits that vide letter dated 27.1.2022, petitioner No. 1 was directed to obtain a consent letter from the first wife of deceased employee and her children and submit the same but till date, direction has not been complied with therefore decision could not be taken. He further submits that this petition deserves to be dismissed. 4) Heard. 5) Taking into consideration the fact that application moved by petitioner No. 1 seeking dependent employment dated 5.1.2022 has not been decided till date, this petition is hereby being disposed directing the respondents No. 1 to 3 to decide the pending application so moved by the petitioner No. 1 strictly in accordance with law, preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6) With the aforesaid direction, this petition stands disposed. However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.07.28 15:47:13 +0530