"%. "% xw^ y^" bESi ~- £i Eiac^ui.ny'&t>NT s.^ a^ .^; rir'SSI.ii.a^H^E | •iAT' uitt'iOiUit BCi¥»rfn hlEE^i sr^^jils ^^^s Lln tl Kam xesnwar, aae abs years, S/o Raghunath Pradad R/o •^ear Sita Ram Kirana Stores, Indira Nagar, Supeta Bhilai, Tehsi! & distt. Dura Chhattisaarh. 3. State of iVladhya Pradesh Through Chlef Secretarv', Govt. of Madhva Pradesh, Vallabh Bhavan, Bhopa! (M.P.) State of C.G., ih Chief Secrefary Govt. of Chhattisgarh D.K.S. Bhavan. Raipur. Chhattisciarh. Dura, Distt. Durg, (C.G.) FRIT APPFAi IINnFR SPfTinM 1 FtF THF f;HI St—^'^fea;^i^&rf^ii^ v^^^%^ | S^u^E^ I Wg- E E 16; iifs.u r;r»isRT»: iE^iteEi E ^i?<w^'6>^iS"'<t. E S^ L TO ir"Mi n"T 9sinfi f^HiE,f .ff^i^ 1 E &^S'- rhia Present: . Shri Uttam Pandev, iearned counsei for the appellarit. Shri Praveen Das, learned Deputy Gov'ernment Advocate forthe State/ resDondents N! /*-. th \'- 'he foitow'sng iudgment of the Court was passed bv^ z. Learned counsel for the parties are heard on admission. Appeilant Ram Keshwar has filed this writ aDDea! aaainst impugned order dated 16-01-2009, passed in W.P.(C) '£7cl'~ifV\7 "? i ^/ A.WW / . ^' /^"^;!'%,, 1 »'~sili i ^ £ff 'y "^i Thi^s n&f'Et'ir'in&r in fh©lA/rif npifEfinn '••.fifWi. 'aocikinn ss riilr^ffF.nin i'r i.lU'EiG:i iEt LiES.3 VSiEi. M'wi.iE.EUE 1 tlV&tS »3&S.-r\HIS-i B '-4Ei ^.^tu'^i',. ^ respondents to provide compassionate empioyment to the petitioner who is brother of one Ramagya who died in the police firingon1stJuly, 1992. 4. The respondents in their counter affidavits cateaoricaiiy pteaded that the family members of those persons who died in the police firing in the year 1992 were provided employment. It was further pieaded that onlv wio'ovrf and son of the deceased were considered as famlly members of the deceased and petitioner Ram Keshwar vvas brother of deceased Ramagya and as such compassionate empioyment was denied to hlm. 5. Learned Single Judge on a thoreugh consideration of the rival submissions of tearned counsel for the parties dld not find any case In favour of the petitioner and therefore passed the impugned oraer dated 16-01-2009, whereby the appeliant's writ itition was dismissed. 6. Shri Uttam Pandey, learned counsei for the appsilant could not point out any provision of law or any scheme framed by the Govemment creating a right in favour of the appellant for seeking compassionate employment on account of the death of appellant's brother Rarnagya in the police firing. /. We, therefore, do not Tlnd any infirmity in the impuaned order vvhlch may warrant interference in this writ appeal. The writ appeal, therefore; is liable to b-s dismissed and i; hereby dismissed summarily. Sd/- ChiefJustics 1 Sd/- SunU Kumar Sinha Judge \viV^t^