1 CGHC010343762026 2026:CGHC:39129 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6512 of 2026 Roshni Bharadwaj Wife Of Late Shri Pawan Kumar Bharadwaj Aged About 46 Years Resident Of N.D.-93, C.S.E.B. Colony, Korba, District - Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Limited Through Its Managing Director, Office At Vidyut Sewa Bhawan, Danganiya, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Chief Engineer (H.R.) C.S.P.G.C.L., Danganiya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Chief Engineer (Generation) D.S.P.M., C.S.P.G.C.L., Korba East, District Korba, Chhattisgarh. 4 - General Manager ( F And A ) Chhattisgarh State Power Generation Company Limited, Danganiya, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 5 - Manager Pension C.G.P.G.C.L., Danganiya, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 6 - Shrishti Bharadwaj D/o Late Pawan Kumar Bhardwaj Aged About 21 Years Through First Wife Smt. Shyama Devi (Divorced), R/o House No 38, Zone 1, Lane No. 1, New Adarsh Nagar, Durg, District Durg (C.G.). ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Syed Mohammad Sohail Afzal, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 5 : Shri Mayank Chandrakar, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 07.09.2026 1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner, claiming to be the legally wedded wife of Late Pawan Kumar Bharadwaj, who was an employee of the Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited (CSPGCL), seeks a direction to the respondents to decide her application for compassionate appointment dated 09.02.2026 and the reminder dated 04.06.2026, filed as Annexures P/3 and P/4, respectively, within a stipulated period. 3 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, by referring to the order passed in the earlier round of litigation in WPS No. 7075/2025 and WPS No. 12757/2025, submits that the daughter of the first wife of the deceased employee had preferred WPS No. 7075/2025, whereas the present petitioner had preferred WPS No. 12757/2025. Both the writ petitions were disposed of with the following observations: “2. In the aforementioned facts of case when petitioner in both the cases are claiming similar relief including death cum retiral dues of deceased employee and compassionate appointment and right of parties to succeed the property of deceased employee is still pending consideration before competent Court, I am of the considered view that petitioner can file appropriate proceeding for redressal of their grievance after crystallizing their rights by the order of competent Court in application filed under Section 372 of the Hindu Succession Act. 3. Accordingly, both the writ petitions are disposed of with the aforesaid observation reserving liberty with respective petitioner to file appropriate proceeding 4 before the appropriate authority for relief of compassionate appointment.” 3. Pursuant to the aforesaid observations, the petitioner as well as the daughter of the first wife of the deceased employee moved their respective representations/applications before the Chief Engineer (HR), CSPGCL, on 09.02.2026, vide Annexure P/2. It is submitted that the said application is still pending and has not been considered. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that, although the earlier applications submitted by the petitioner as well as the daughter of the first wife of the deceased employee were rejected on the ground that a dispute existed between the two family members and, therefore, their claims could not be considered, the applications presently submitted pursuant to the directions and observations made by this Court in WPS No. 7075/2025 and WPS No. 12757/2025 shall be considered in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as respondent No. 6, who is the daughter of the deceased employee. It is further submitted that the 5 said applications shall be considered and decided within a period of 50 days. 5. In view of the aforesaid submission, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the applications submitted by the petitioner and respondent No. 6, in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing to both of them, within a period of 50 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE shoaib