1 CGHC010541642025 2026:CGHC:34245 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 348 of 2026 Adarsh Baghel S/o Late Deepak Baghel Aged About 31 Years R/o Ward No. 42, Prabhat Nagar, Lalbag, Rajnandgaon, Tahsil And District Rajnandgaon C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 2 - Director, Urban Administration And Development Department, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 3 - Joint Director, Urban Administration And Development Department, Regional O2ce, Durg, Division- Durg C.G. 4 - Commissioner, Nagar Palik Nigam, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon C.G. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) SHOAIB ANWAR Digitally signed by SHOAIB ANWAR Date: 2026.08.05 17:14:51 +0530 2 For Petitioner(s) :Shri Pramod Ramteke, Advocate For Respondent(s) :Ms. Akansha Verma, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No. 4 :Shri Manas Vajpai, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri Sandeep Dubey, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 05.08.2026 1. The present writ petition has been 9led by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to consider and grant compassionate appointment in his favour as a dependent of his deceased father, Late Deepak Baghel, who passed away on 15.12.2019 while serving as a Sanitation Worker in the Nagar Palik Nigam, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, under respondent No. 4. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that, following the demise of his father, he submitted an application dated 17.01.2020 seeking compassionate appointment. However, despite the lapse of a considerable period, the said application has not yet been decided by the competent authority. It is contended that the inordinate delay in deciding the application defeats the very object of compassionate appointment, which is intended to 3 provide immediate 9nancial assistance to the bereaved family of a deceased employee. 3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Corporation submits that the petitioner's pending application for compassionate appointment shall be considered and decided by the competent authority, strictly in accordance with the applicable rules and policy governing compassionate appointments, within a period of 50 days. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the limited prayer made by the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the present petition pending. Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the petitioner's claim, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority/respondent No. 4 to consider and decide the petitioner's application dated 17.01.2020 (Annexure P/2) for grant of compassionate appointment, in accordance with law and the applicable policy, by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 50 days from the date of receipt of a certi9ed copy of this order. 4 5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment. The competent authority shall consider and decide the petitioner's application independently and strictly in accordance with law, without being inAuenced by any observation contained in this order. 6. With the aforesaid directions and observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE Shoaib