’ \l ‘\ \"B) 1/ 1:»: ’IGH comarr cm JUDIeATmm AT JABAI§§ . ® WRIT pmxmow umDER ARTILCE 225/227 OF ' caumwt‘wrom‘ OF mum. W.p. i§0‘$03{ K {99’ PET ITIONER o Vijay Kumar Prajapati S/o. Late $a6hu Saran Prajapati. agaci abcut 3 years R/o‘ Village— odhanpur Tehsn/ PS- Ambikapur wistrictw $argujm, Fw. “VerSuS‘ RESPONbENT$. 1¢ The 3tate of MJ’. through the Secretary, Revenue Department, Blwpal, M 2. The M.P. $tate~Road Transport Corporation. throuh its Managing Director, Head afxiice at Eabibganj palJa 3. Up Maha 1°rabandhak ( Karmik} M.P. state Road Trasport Corporation. Bhopal. M 4. Collector, Sarguja, Ambikapur District.» Sarguja, EdiPr 5; Cukakh‘sgaztk AWw SWEW “6‘“ W‘KM Mt‘govwr M gpbg‘“ 42¢};Wl/Miw- Q41%m(c,q . mE 2 G P. g BhoP. n P‘ gh ] ', @~ NM HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Wn't Petition No'. 5021' of 1999 M Petitioner Vijay Kumar Pxajapati Versus V v Respondents The State. of MP. 85 others Single Bench z Hon’bls Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. Shri A. K. Prasad, counsel for the petitioner. None for the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3. Shn' Pankaj Shn'vastava, Panel lawyer for the respondent No. 4/State. Shri Seuneef Sahu, counsel for the. respondent No. 5, ORAL ORDER (6th March, 2006} Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that father of the petjh'oner Late Shri Sadhu Saran Prajapati was employed by the .Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Depot as Job Keeper and poeted at Baloda Bazar Depot, Raipur. Late Shn' Sadhu Saran Prajapati, died on 31.3. 1998, in hamess‘ The petitioner, who happens to be dependant of Late Shri Sadhu Saran Prajapati, tiled an application on 4.11.1999 for compassionate appointment (Annexure P—T). According to leained counsel for the peh'tioner, his representation hae not been decided so far in the teeth of the Government Circulars dated 10.6. 1994 and 31.5. 1999 (Annexure P—6), wherein it has clearly been stated that the dependants of the employees, who had died in hainess, be appointed on compassionate basis. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, at this stage, confines his prayer to the effect that the respondents be directed to consider . R “t”! K§7 311d decid€ his repmsentation dated 4.1L1999 along with fresh rspmsentation to be $ed by the petitioner within two weeks. 5. The respondent No. 5 fairly statss that the case of tha petitioner will be considerad, in accordance with law aftar ascertaining the fact as to whether he was assigned State of Madhya Pradesh or State of Chhattisgarh as admittedly the petitioner has been working at Baloda Bazar, District— Raipiir. The petitioner is granted libexty to file a fresh mpresentation, if any, within a petiod of two weeks and. the respondent No. 5 is directed to consider the earlier representation dated 4, 1 1.1999 along with fresh repmsentation of the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the fresh representation, in accordance with law, For the reasons stated above, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. " r r. Sdl- satish K. Agnihotri Judge