1 CGHC010190972020 2026:CGHC:36390 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3749 of 2020 Ku. Divya Banjare D/o Santram Banjare Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Sukhatal, Post Lalpur, Tahsil Lormi, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Home Affairs Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Inspector General Of Police Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Superintenent Of Police Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Pranjal Shukal, Panel Lawyer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal (Order on Board) 14.08.2026 1. In this petition, the petitioner has challenged order dated 16.04.2020 (Annexure-P/01), passed by the respondent No.01, whereby her claim for grant of compassionate appointment has been rejected. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is bad, illegal and unsustainable in law and, therefore, the same is liable to be set aside. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel supported the impugned SAIFAN KHAN Digitally signed by SAIFAN KHAN 2 order and prays for dismissal of this petition. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties considered their rival submission made herein-above and went through the record. 5. In the case at hand, brother of the petitioner- Ram Kumar Banjare died in harness on 22.08.2007, thereafter, on 04.02.2008, the father of the deceased government servant filed application for grant of compassionate appointment to his daughter- Ku. Vidhya Banjare (elder sister of the petitioner herein), but the same stood rejected vide order dt. 08.02.2008 by the respondents. However, the said rejection order dtl. 08.02.2008 was not challenged further, therefore, the same attained finality. Now, the petitioner (another sister of the deceased government servant) again preferred application after 11 years that compassionate appointment be granted to her, which has been rejected by impugned order dt. 16.04.2020 on the ground of delay and latches. 6. In that view of the matter, since earlier rejection order dated 08.02.2008 has not been challenged and, therefore, the same has attained finality and, furthermore, the death of the deceased government servant occurred on 22.08.2007 and directing the respondents to grant compassionate appointment now i.e. after about 19 years will be against the objectives of grant of compassionate appointment rather it would be a case of directing to grant regular appointment, which cannot be done in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. I do not find any merit in this petition. It is, accordingly, dismissed. s@if sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge