jN THE HIGH CQI )RT OF HJIECA’I‘URE AT BILQSRR Wxitpexmon No. i575 /200Q~ PEH'IIQNER Eitmdm Emmi“ Mama S/o late Shn' Chandrabali Mshra, Agei about 1?? years: Omupaiion» Lhanployed, Rio Range Workshop, Police Line, Bilaspur. — Vexsus ~» ESPONDENTS‘ yStabe of Qlhattisgmfg Througn Secretaty, Deparlmmt of Home, Mmtralwa, DKSBbawm Shagtt‘i Chowlg Raipur. Engimctor Ganemi 0f Police, Bilaspur. $up¢riutcndmt 0f P03ice, Jamjgér Ckmpa $upexintandent of Poiicg Biiaspur. % WRET PEI‘ITIQN UNDER ARTXCLE 22? OF THE. QaNSmu-“HSN Q}? 13mm FQR mgumcg 9F A maxi m THE NATURE OFJERFxpmg?‘ Wiggwrmmwgy ORANYOEER SMTAELE ©RDER‘GR‘DERE6HON TO DO mncE 1N THE MATTE}; Damils ofthé: petiiian: e 1. HSR'IEC’ULQREOF TEE PEWTIGNER' Ag pé: Gauss 151%. PAKL‘IQEARS OF THE RESWNDENI‘S ' A2; pix $M§$ iii’le. <3 " R g Respondents-Stat by Shri Ranbir Singh, Govt. Advocatq Heard. - 3 By this petition der Article 226/227 of-th‘e Constitution of ‘ India the petitioner ii seeking the relief of compaesionatte appointment on the und that his father Late ‘Chandrabéli Mishra died while he W in service of police department. Learne ’counsel for the petition r pointed out that as per the guideline: Annexure R/4 dated 1 .6. 1994 the petitioner was entitled to getk compassionate appoin ent'as such the order Annexure P/f‘ dated 19.8.1999 was issued. Learned counsel for thed‘petitione/r further pointed out that in Annexure P/3 name of three applicant‘s are there, family members of Smt. Ram Pyari Wd/o Late Ram" Singh, Constable No. 563 and Smt. Shyam Bai Wd/o Late Manharan Kurre, Constable No. 1065 have been given 1.1 compassionate appointment but same benefit has not been giVen to the family member of Smt. Shivdevi Mishra Wd/o Later GRPR]—F§ i000. \ é , \ \ m W, ma TEE v up. {J Nu‘ IS§ leQL W2©Q aw?W (Wu) ‘L i aw ax:m "cm ar‘E‘iiW mt @313 WEST amwfm wm’c'i‘f § @éi ‘ri‘mgw ‘ ii? 3W W‘EWI’ W 18.7. 2002 Petitioner by Shri shant Mishra, Advocate. WWW . {@fw‘wx Bhunbai Sahu Vs. Statefiof Chhattisgarh) and also on a decision of Hon’ble Supreme-go ~ 4 reported in (2000) 6 soc 493 (Balbir Kam and another Vs. stméf ’7' ‘ Aunhbnty or India Ltd. and lomers), wherein it has been held that \ “The Family Benefit Schem submits that the claim o the Chandtabali, Constable No. 880 Whose na‘me finds place at. Sr.No.2 in the order Anne ure P/3. Counsel for petitioner further petitioner has been denied on then basis of guidelines Annex 1.5.2000 and the guidelin s Annexure R/5 which came into fame? A from. 14.1.2000, wherea the petitioner is entitled to: get comhassionate appointm t on the basis of the gguidelinesj 3‘ Annexure R/4 and on th t basis the order Annexure 13/3 was issued, and as the benefit has been given to two other similarly? ‘ situated persons, hence the petitioner is entitled for same benefit. contention learned counsel for the In support of his petitioner placed reliance on a decision of this Court reperted in 2002(1) C.G.L.J. 257 (Sum. \\ / /§000‘5o,009. e P/ 13 which cameinto force from,» e cannot in any way be equated with / ‘ WWW m;2g$ WwW<W§m riffgmgqg’i E. em WW ‘ ‘mm ~ "1— wwmwwm m‘ %:a?'fziqané:w ‘31 3‘s?W, W11a, ‘cgwmug ? campassionate appointment. The sudden jerk in the family by reason of the death of the breadearner can only be absorbed by the family by lump-sum amount provided to it- this is rather unfortunate but this is a reality. The feeling of security drops to zero on the death of the b1 reigns, and at that juncture} if some lump-sum amount is made available with a compassionate appointment, the grief—stricken family may fmd some solace to the mental agony and manage its affairs in the normal cours of events.” It is further held that “denial of compassionate appointment would neither be fair nor reasonable in the context of constitutional philosophy. The concept of social justice is the yardstick to the justice administration system or the legal justice. The geatest virtue of .‘eadearner and insecurity thereafter a u law is in its adaptability andi flexibility. The court ought to apply l lawdepending upon the sitiiation because law is made for the society. Whatever is beneficial for the society, the endeavor of the law court would be to admini ster justice having due regard to it. /2/2000#—5(§,000. WW ‘ d W .mgm: a V‘é ZQ$ -&WW(W&D arr§wafw€s g I Wwaamw. ‘g ¢ “W1 ‘ m 1m?‘1§f@2“"mv %w‘%’qa¥r&¥i‘ ‘ _r~ a‘a W, WW Ira 1%1Evwg€ WW? ‘Wz WW (Wm mwfsam '4' Having thus considere matexial available on record ofjustice would be served if a direction is given to the respondents to consider and decide compassionate appointment the date of production/recei] with the circular/ guidelines ‘ was applicable at the time o Annexure P/3 and cases of considered; With the above observa Certifled copy as per Rl A copy of this order he Advocate who shall forward i \WM tA—AA__ A .A A ‘ “WWW “w wé§i Wm; WW¥%W:WR ' $3§f‘:—mw?i¥i HTT’WAW tion this petition is disposed of. lles. supplied to Shri Ranbir Singh, Govt. tto the authorities ‘ms"\ 4v ' y GgPRi FS/350—12/2000-50«000‘ §t$h Eiéw '37 w/,y;1°7 Sd'_ Fakhruddin Judge :d the facts and circumstances and in the opinion of this Court the ends the claim of the petitioner for within a period of one month from )t of copy of this order in accordance lated 10.6. 1994 Annexure R/4 which f passing of the order dated 19.8.99 two similarly situated persons were m ‘ > J l