1 CGHC010258052022 2026:CGHC:37306 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5483 of 2022  Igrees S/o Late Lal Guru Aged About 25 Years R/o Quarter No 15, Block-15, Atal Aawas Vijyapuram, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration, Mantralay, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Commissioner (Municipal Corporation) Bilaspur District, Chhattisgarh. 3. Shri Narendra Kumar S/o Late Lal Guru R / Quarter No.2, Block 15, Atal Aawas Vijyapuram, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Badruddin Khan, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Amandeep Singh, P.L. For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Abhyuday Singh, Advocate For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Pavas Sharma, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 20.8.2026 1) By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought following reliefs:- 10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of petitioners. 2 10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly further be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to give compassionate appointment in municipal cor. Bilaspur. 10.3 Cost of the petition may also be granted. 2) Facts of present case are that Lal Guru, who was working on the post of Sweeper in Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur died in harness on 13.1.2006 leaving behind his widow, two sons (petitioner and respondent No. 3) and a daughter. Petitioner moved various applications for grant of compassionate appointment but the same were not considered whereas the application moved by the respondent No. 3, which was supported by consent letter was considered by the respondent No. 2. However, appointment order has not been issued in favor of respondent No. 3 till date. 3) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner being the elder son of deceased government servant has right to claim compassionate appointment. He further submits that petitioner never gave consent to the respondent No. 3 to gain compassionate appointment and objection in this regard was also raised before the authority concerned. He prays that a direction may be issued to respondent No. 2 to consider the name of petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment. 4) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 submits that respondent No. 3 moved application for grant of compassionate appointment which was supported by consent 3 letter given by the family members. He further submits that the consent letter was countersigned by his sister as well as petitioner therefore objection raised by the petitioner is misconceived and the law of estoppel would operate against petitioner. 5) Heard. 6) Having considered the dispute involved in the present case, this petition is hereby being disposed directing respondent No. 2 to take appropriate decision with regard to grant of compassionate appointment after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as respondent No. 3, who will be at liberty to lead evidence in support of their respective claims, if so desired. 7) It is expected that respondent No. 2 shall conclude the entire exercise within period of 120 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 8) With the aforesaid direction, this petition is disposed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.08.20 15:13:04 +0530