1 2026:CGHC:19799 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4151 of 2021  Sunita Goyal W/o Late Ramlakhan Goyal Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Dughasi, Post Khamrodh, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Tahsil And District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Pin- 492002, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Chief Executive Officer, Jila Panchayat, District Koria, Chhattisgarh, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh 3. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Bharatpur, District-Koria, Chhattisgarh, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 2375 of 2022  Pradeep Kumar Nishad S/o Paras Ram Nishad Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Magarghata, Police Station Nandghat, Block Nawagarh, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2. Collector Bemetara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh. 3. The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Bemetara District Bemetara Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from Case Information System) SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2026.04.30 14:31:29 +0530 2 For Respective Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vaibhav P. Shukla, Advocate and Mr. Ravi Maheshwari, Advocate For State : Mr. Vinay Pandey, Dy. Advocate General For Respective Respondents : Mr. B.P. Banjare, Advocate Ms. Harneet Kaur, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 29.04.2026 1. Since common questions of law and facts are involved in both the petitions, therefore, they are clubbed together, heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. In both the petitions, the claim of the petitioners with regard to compassionate appointment has been rejected on the ground that the petitioners do not have the requisite qualification of B.Ed./D.Ed. and TET for appointment on the post of Shisha Karmi Grade III. 3. Learned Advocates appearing for the petitioners submitted that the Husband/Father of the petitioners were working on the post of Teacher (Panchayat)/ Shiksha Karmi Grade III. The date of appointment, place of posting and the date of death are given below:- Case No. Date of Appointments Place of Posting Date of Death WPS/4151/2021 25.07.1998 Govt. Primary School, Lardhadani, Tehsil Bharatpur, District Bharatpur 14.03.2014 WPS/2375/2022 1995 Govt. Middle School, Khapari, Block Nawagarh, District Bemetara 17.02.2011 4. They further submitted that the petitioners moved applications for the grant 3 of compassionate appointment according to policy contemplated in the C.G. Teacher (Panchayat) Cadre (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as “Rules, 2012”). They also submitted that the claim of the petitioners has not been considered strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Rules, 2012. They further contended that the petitioners are ready to join services against Class IV posts. In the rules also there is no provision that the dependant of the deceased Government servants would be granted appointment only on the post of Teacher (Panchayat)/ Shiksha Karmi Grade III; therefore, the decision taken by the State authorities that the petitioners do not have the requisite qualification for appointment to the post of Teacher (Panchayat)/Shiksha Karmi Grade III is erroneous and contrary to the rules. They also contended that the services of the petitioners were not absorbed in the School Education Department and this is one of the reasons for the non-consideration of their names. It is further stated that a committee was constituted by the State Government vide order dated 13.09.2021 to resolve the dispute with regard to the compassionate appointment of Shiksha Karmis, who died prior to the date of absorption. It is argued that no decision has been taken by the committee till date. They further stated that a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to consider the claim of the petitioners. 5. On the other hand, learned counsels appearing for the respondents would oppose. They further submitted that the deceased employees died prior to the date of absorption of their services and a circular was issued by the State Government to the effect that the Shiksha Karmis who died prior to the date of absorption, their dependents would get employment on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade III; particularly, the dependents, who have passed B.Ed./D.Ed 4 and TET. They also submitted that the petitioners do not have the requisite qualifications; therefore, their claim has not been considered. It is contended that the petitioners were granted the opportunity to acquire the required qualification, but they failed; therefore, their claims were rejected. It is further contended that there is no provision to provide employment on any other post. It is stated that according to Rule 7 of the Rules, 2012, the dependents may be provided compassionate appointment on the post of Teacher (Panchayat) only, as the sanctioned cadre was Shiksha Karmi Grade I, II, & III only. They contended that as the minimum required qualification for a Teacher is 12th, D.Ed., TET or Graduation, B.Ed and TET; therefore, the dependents cannot be appointed against any other post and no such posts are available with the department. They further argued that these petitions deserve to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on the record. 7. The Husband/Father of the petitioners were appointed to the posts of Teacher(Panchayat)/Shiksha Karmi Grade III. They died prior to the date of absorption while they were working on the post of Shiksha Karmis. Their dependents moved applications for grant of compassionate appointment. The claims of the petitioners have been rejected on the ground that they do not have the requisite qualification. 8. The services of all Teachers (Panchayat) were absorbed with the School Education Department pursuant to a notification issued on 30.06.2018 and at currently posts of Shiksha Karmis are not available with the department. The petitioners could not acquire required qualification for the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade I, II, and III; therefore, they have not been considered for grant 5 of compassionate appointment, but the fact remains that the posts of Shiksha Karmis are not available with the department; therefore, no such appointment can be provided to the petitioners, even they have the requisite qualification. 9. Looking at the facts discussed above, a decision was taken by the State Government and a committee was constituted by the General Administration Department on 13.09.2021 to resolve the dispute. It appears that till date no decision has been taken; therefore, at this juncture, both the petitions are disposed of with a direction to the committee constituted on 13.09.2021, to resolve the dispute involved in these petitions within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 10. The respondent authorities may consider the claim of petitioners for appointment against Class IV posts. 11. With the aforesaid observation(s), and direction(s), these petitions are hereby disposed of.Sd Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE $iddhant