‘4' C 3C 12%;] A PETITIONERS:~ / 1. Akash Joshi , ¢6,¢e1 gawk Zé yaw—Lg” S/ o Late Vishawanath Joshi, R/ o J—84 Narth Avsnue, Choubey colony Raipur, District'— Raipur (C.G.) A: Cha’ndra’Shekhar Dora’, égeJ d’Wb-‘Zgatg S/o Late A. Mohan Dora R/o C/o A. laxmi dora, Near PWD ofiice (S.E.R1y) Railway Colony Mahasamund District — Mahasamund (C.G;) Arun Chandrakar @E‘J wad—<35 1W; S/o Late Tribhuwan Chandrakar a&‘ R/O Village — Neuardhih, Post — Mandhar, District — Raipur (C.G.) Sangeeta Sahu , g—g‘J mu? 3? W) D/O late Prahalad Sing SahU' gay” R/ o Teachers colony, Behind — Sara Bhai Clinic, Daganiya, District — Raipur (C.G. Sabir Ali , 4m! 4194‘} $3 W’a S/o Late Jafar Ali R/o Village 81, Post — Sarda, / Tahsil :— Berla, District — Durg (C.G.) Girdhar lal Sahu I W {Jack} 11° ?m)‘a‘~ S/o Late Kesh Ram Sahu R/ O Village — Post — Bhatgaon, Sarda, Tahsil — Berla, District — Durg (C.G.) Ashawani Kumar Manhare ,WM M 7w: S/o Jailal Manhare, R/o Village 8a Post — Sarda, Tahsil — Berla, District —- Durg (C.G.) \ Kamiesh Joshi , w eiML M‘l% S/ O Late Goverdhan Joshi R/ o Bramhan para, Dhamdha, ) District — Durg (C.G.) Yashvanf Kumar , Wei/«kg gs 7W’gi S/o. Late Ranjan Singh R/O Kailash Nagar Durg, District — Durg,(C.G.) /10. Baljnath Yadav v (U344 «bud £4 W S/o Late Smt Radha Bal R/O T1turdh1h Durg Dlstrlct Durg (C G ) /1 1. Smt Padma Suryavanshl , (pg/J mhr [loyea/L; D/o A K Suryavansh1 R, O Adlvash1 Colony, Kushalpur Ralpur D1str1ct Ralpur (C G 1 Ku Punam Bals 7 $544 abaur 2A 7W ’ D/ o Lat6 Rav1 Smgh Bals R/O H 19 ESE Colony Ra1pur, District — Raipur (C.G. VERSUS RESPONDENTS: — /1. The state of Chhamsgarh, Though — the principal secretary, Department of general administration, Mantralaya, d.k.s. bhawan ,Raipur (C.G.) The secretary School educatlon department Mantralaya, d.k.s.bhawan ,Raipur (C.G.) The collector, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) The collector, Mahasamund, District — Mahasamund (C.G.) -Th‘e‘5’e‘olléct0r, Durg District — Durg (C.G.) District education officer Mahasamund, Mahasamund - Raipur (C.G.) District education officer Durg, , District — Durg (C.G.) District education officer Raipur, District — Raipur (C.G.) . Chief executive officer, Janpad panchayat, i Dharsiva, district —'Raipur (C.G.) ) Chisf execufive oflicer, Janpad panchayat, Mahasamund ,District — Mahasamund (C.G.) Chief executive officer, Janpad panchayat, Barela, District — Durg (C.G.) H!GH COURT OFCHHATTPSGARH AT BILASPUR (Hon’ble Mr Justice Pritmker Diwaker! W P NOS 727512010 72?8I201 0 7279/2010 728Gl2010 728%!2010 72821201 9 72831291 0 ?2°4l2®‘ O 7295/291 0 ?298I201 0 ?29?’I2D? D 72981201 0 729912MD 73061201 0 & 7289/201 0 Post for pronouncement of the iudgment dated H71 2/2010. i/ M, Sd/- Prmnker D‘waker ,3“. Judge ‘ §"\ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (Hon. Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker) Writ Petition No. (S) 7275 of 2010 PETITIONER Dhruv Kumar Rathore VERSUS RESPONDENTS State of C.G. and others Writ Petition No. (S) 7278 of 2010 PETITIONER Kamal Kishore Patel VERSUS RESPONDENTS State of C.G. and others Writ Petition No. (S) 7279 of 2010 PETITIONER Shankar Prasad Kanwar VERSUS RESPONDENTS State of C.G. and others Writ Petition No. (S) 7280 of 2010 PETITIONER lshwar Prasad Yadav 4Eii§USI RESPONDENTS State of C.G. and others Writ Petition No. (S) 7281 of 201D PETITIONER Mahendra Kumar r VERSUS State of C.G. and others RESPONDENTS Wit Pt (S 78 f 201 r eition No. ) 22 o 0 PETITIONER Sy anja Kumar Sahu VSS ERU State of C.G. and others Writ Petition No. (S) 7283 of 201 0 PETITIONER Harpal Singh Kawar VERSUS State of C. and others RS ESPONDENT Writ Petition No. S) 7284 of 2010 ( Anil Kumar Nl irma VERSS U hs RESPONDENTS State of C.G. and oter PETITIONER Writ Petition No. (S) 7295 of 10 20 PETITIONER Rajendra Kumar ingh S VERSUS State of C.G. and others RESPONDENTS Writ Petition No. (S) 7296 of 201 0 Dhirendra Singh Kanwar VERSUS State of C.G. an oters d h z PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Writ Petition N0. (S) 7297 of 2010 Kiran Kumar Binjhwar PETITIONER RESPONDENTS .G 0% ._q_ n all the aforesaid petitions the law point raised by the petitioners is that though they are entitled to be appointed as Assistant Teacher on compassionate ground, they have been illegally appointed as S-hiksha Karmi Grade III and therefore they have prayed for issuance of directions that they may be appointed as Assistant Teacher in place of Shiksha Karmi Grade iii. The other law point invoived in all these cases is that having accepted the appointment as Shiksha Karmi on compassionate ground and worked on the said post for sumcient time, can they subsequentiy claim for their appointment on regular post. Thus the point to be decided being common, all these petitions are disposed of by this common order. 2. Facts, in brief, of all the cases run thus: 3. In W.P. No. 7275/2010 father of the petitioner namely late Shr T.R. Rathore died on 20.2.2003 while working as head master in the School Education Department and after his death the petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade iii on 10.8.2004 (Annexure P-1). 4. In W.P. No. 7278/2010 father of the petitioner namely late Chhotelal Patel died on 22.1.1995 while working as Upper Division Teacher in the chool Education Department and after his death the petitioner was ppointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade iii on 16.3.1999 vide Annexure P—1. 5. In W P No 7279/2010 father of the petitioner namely late Ram Singh Kanwar died on 18 1O 2003 while working as Princ1pal In the School Education Department a’nd after his death the petitioner was appomted as Shiksha Karmi Grade lll on 19.10.2004 Vide Annexure P-1. 6. In W P No 7280/2010 mother of the petitioner namely late Smt .k-wr AmanNati Yadav died on 20 7 2005 while working as Cook (Ras0ia) in the School Education Department and after her death the petitioner was i appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade III on‘ 19.1 .2006 vide Annexure P-1. Lt; 7. In W.P. No. 7281/2010 father of the petitioner namely late Jimipal Singh died on 4.10.1998 while working as Assistant Teacher in the School‘ I i S a l (2)1 ‘ $— Education Department and after his death the petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade Ill on 2.7.1999 vide Annexure P—1. 8. In W.P. No. 7282/2010 father of the petitioner namely Iate Raja Ram Sahu died on 20.1.2000 while working as Assistant Teacher in the School Education Department and after his death the petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade lll on 5.5.2006 vide Annexure P-1. 9. In W.P. No. 7283/2010 father of the petitioner namely late Samarat Singh Kawar died on 15.3.2005 while working as Assistant Teacher in the School Education Department and after his death the petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade lll on 12.12.2005 vide Annexure P-1. 10. In W.P. No. 7284/2010 father of the petitioner namely late Bhagat Ram Nirmal died on 3.7.1998 while working as Assistant Teacher in the School Education Department and after his death the petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade III on 2.7.1999 vide Annexure P-1. 11. ln W.P. No. 7295/2010 father of the petitioner namely Iate Mohit Singh Paikra died on 13.8.2008 while working as Assistant Teacher in the School Education Department and after his death the petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade lll on 5.9.2009 vide Annexure P-1. 12. ln W.P. No. 7296/2010 father of the petitioner namely late Bahoran Singh Kanwar died on 2010.2000jwhile working as Assistant Teacher in the School Education Department and after his death the petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade iii on 15.5.2006 vide Annexure P-1. l fl 7 13 ln W P No 7297/2010 father of the petitioner namely late Dukalu ‘ Singh BInJhwar died on 1 11 2008 while working as ASSIstant Teacher iny the School Education Department and after his death the petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade lll on,.17.5.2010 vide Annexure P—1. 14. in W.P. No. 7298/2010 father of the petitioner namely late Ramdhan Binjhwar died on 23.10.2007 while working as Assistant Teacher in the; h l @0 -é, School Education Department and after his death the petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade ill on 5.9.2009 vide Annexure P-1. 15. In W.P. No. 7299/2010 father of the petitioner namely Iate R.R. Binjhwar died on 23.10.2008 while working as Principal in the School Education Department and after his death the petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade iii on 14.5.2010 vide Annexure P-1. 16. In W.P. No. 730012010 father of the petitioner namely Iate Sahdeo Prasad Sahu died on 8.5.2000 while working as Assistant Teacher in the chool Education Department and after his death the petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade lll on 19.5.2006 vide Annexure P-1. 17. ln W.P. No. 7269/2010 the deceased employees on whom th petitioners herein were dependant before their death, have died during the course of their employment. After the death of deceased employees the petitioners herein were appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade iii on 20.7.2006, 30.10.2006, 13.2.2006, 2.6.2006, 22.3.2005 and 22.8.2005 on compassionate ground. 1. Undisputed facts are that all the petitioners were appointed a Shiksha Karmi Grade lll on compassionate ground and they are still working on the same post. After expiry of sufficient period the petitioners have filed these writ petitions before this Court claiming that they ought to have been given compassionate” appointment on a regular post and not as Shiksha Karmi Grade iii. Petitioners have raised the following points in their writ petitions. (A) As per the government policy dated 10.6.2003 the petitioners ought to have been appointed on compassionate ground against a regular post and not as Shiksha Karmi Grade Ill. (B) Post of Shiksha Karmi is not a State Cadre one but is the post of ‘ g Panchayat Department under the control of Janpad and Jila Panchayat. S e 8 s i (‘7 ._7,. (C) That the Government has'issued instructions to all the departments not to appoint any person on compassionate ground on daily wages or collector rate. 19. Time and again it has been reiterated by the Apex Court that the compassionate appointment is a back door entry and therefore the petitioners should feel satisfied for getting the post of Shiksha Karmi on compassionate ground. 20. In view of the facts discussed above and the decisions of the Apex Court in the matter of State of Rajsthan v. Umrao Singh (1994) 6 SCC 560; in the matter of State of Haryana v. Naresh Kumar Bali (1994) 4 SCC 48; in the matter of IG, (Karmik) and others V. Prahlad Mani Tripathi (2007) SCC 162; decision of this Court in the matter of Rekharam Nidhi and others v. State of Chhattisgarh and others W.P. 3175/2004 dealing with identical question of compassionate appointment in detail, and also keeping in view the other decision of this Court in W.P. (S) No.470’l/2008 (Dinesh Kumar Garg v. State of Chhattisgarh and others) and other identical matters, deciding this point as to whether Shiksha Karmis appointed on compassionate ground can seek the appointment on higher post and ultimately dismissing the petitioners’ claim for the same, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present petitions assailing the action of the respondents in giving compassionate appointment to the petitioners on the post of Shiksha Karmi, do not have any merit and accordingly they are hereby dismissed. J/V, ’ Sdl- . Pritinker Diwake‘ " Judge \ 4