1 CGHC010337572022 2026:CGHC:38425 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7046 of 2022 1 - Vijay Kumar S/o Rajendra Kumar Mehattar Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Ward No. 1 Gram Dhamdha Tahsil Dhamdha District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Sachiv Chhattisgarh Nagriy Prashasan Avm Vikash Vibhag, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Sanchalak, Sanchanalaya Nagariy Prashasan Avm Vibhag Chhattisgarh Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Sayukt Sanchalak Nagariy, Prashasan Avm Vikash Chhetriya Kariyalay Durg District Durg Chhattisgarh. 4 - Collector, Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh. 5 - Mukhya Nagar Palica, Adhikari Nagar Panchayat Dhamdha, District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner/s : None. For Respondents/State : Shri T.L. Bareth, P.L. For Respondent No.5 : Ms. Natasha Khan, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 31/08/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- NIRMALA RAO 2 “10.1 यह कि, उत्तरवा दीगण किदीकित किय जा वा कि वा य कि त / मृत मृ पुत्र मृत मृ स्था पुर अम्पु कियकि# घ्र दीवा%। 10.2 यह कि उत्तरवा दीगण किदीकित किय जा वा कि वा य कि त अम्पु कियकि# सं(बं(धी पु आवादीपुत्र य कि संवा ई अवासंर दीत ह-य घ्र किर रण र%। 10.3 यह कि, अन्य अतष जा मृ य न्य य लय उकित संमृझे उत्तरवा दीगण2 सं य कि त किदील य जा वा%।" 2. The facts, in brief, are that the mother of the petitioner, namely, Dukalhin Bai, was working on the post of Sweeper under respondent No.5. She died in harness on 25.2.2022. The petitioner, being the elder son, moved an application for grant of compassionate appointment before respondent No.5, along with a consent letter from the other dependents. Respondent No.5, vide order dated 14.9.2022, rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the father of the petitioner is also working on the post of Safai Kamgar under the respondents. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that, as one of the family members of the deceased employee is already in government service, the petitioner is not entitled to compassionate appointment in terms of Clause 6(A) of the policy dated 23.2.2019. They would submit that the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. Heard. 5. The Division Bench of this Court, in W.A. No.429 of 2026, vide order dated 12.5.2026, in the matter of Commissioner, Municipal Corporation vs. Mukund Hela and Ors., has held that the object of compassionate appointment would stand frustrated if the claim of the writ petitioner is rejected solely on account of the employment of his mother, despite the 3 fact that the family had lost its earning member and continued to face financial hardship. Merely because one member of the family is engaged in a low-paid post would not, in every case, conclusively establish that the family has ceased to suffer financial distress. 6. The mother of the petitioner was working as a Sweeper under respondent No.5, and the claim of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that his father is working on the post of Safai Kamgar under the respondents. It is not a case where the father of the petitioner is a government servant receiving a handsome salary; rather, he is working on the post of Safai Kamgar. Clause 6(A) of the policy applies when one of the dependents of the family of a deceased employee is already in government service. It is nowhere stated that the father of the petitioner holds a public office or is a government servant. The father of the petitioner is a low-paid employee and, therefore, Clause 6(A) of the policy dated 23.2.2019 ought to have been relaxed by respondent No.5 while considering the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment. 7. Accordingly, the order dated 14.9.2022, contained in Annexure-R-5/1, is hereby quashed. Respondent No.5 is directed to reconsider the claim of the petitioner within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the petitioner. 8. With the aforesaid observation(s), this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi