kw'w f‘ w l ”Mk / {"MW"; \ t? g IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR. WRIT PETITION No. 1459' OF 2004 / SMT. CHHAYA BAIS W/O LATE SHRI ANIL SINGH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS 5 2. UTKARSHA SINGH BAIS S/o LATE SHRI ANIL SINGH BAIS, AGED ABOUT 17 TEARS 8 MONTHS, MINOR THROUGH HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER SMT. CHHAYA BAIS. THE ABOVE NAMED PETITIONERS ARE C/O SHRI AKHIL SINGH BAIS, QUARTER NO.408 C.S.E.B. COLONY, ' KORBA, DISTRICT KORBA, (C.G.). VERSUS W 6 CHHATTISGARH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THROUGH: THE SECRETARY DANGANIYA, RAIPUR (CG). 2. MADHYA PRADESH ELECTRICITY BOARD, THROUGH: THE SECRETARY, SHAKTI BHAWAN JABALPUR, (M.P.). // WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF AN APPROPRIATE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS/CERTIORARI ETC. OR DIRECTION/ORDER IN THE LIKE NATURE ETC. TO, THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HIS HON’BLE COMPANION JUDGES OF THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR, (CHHATTISGARH) MAY THIS PLEASE TO YOUR LORDSHIP, / w / J, . __._ XI-HC—78 W Aw”; . r r HW,WW;W . wIiP (égg? mm oooo‘o¢qoooo ‘ov0‘~b 1H 2004- WWRETW) WW E¢TW marafg—am %mm 226/22? of 'the Constitution of a, the! after the death of Ant} Singh, ' petitioner No.1, wife cf Late 6-?-20D6 Mr. Rakesh Pandey, counsel :for the petiticners. Mr. A.S. Gaharwar, Advocaie, with Mrs. Rita Haider, counsei for i'espondent No.1 . Mr. Vivek Vetma, counsel for respondent No.2. Mr. S.K. Beriwal, Centra! Govt. Counse! for respondent No.3. endant-s of Late Anii Singh, who died in as Tesring Assistant Grade—m at ’Korbe The petitioners, who are d harness on 11-3—1 998 wh‘iie work in the services of erstwhire MPEB, have med this writ petition under Articie? m r t Singh, applied for compassionate appointment and her application w s rejected on the ground that she being over age, not entitied for compassi hate appointment. _ At that time, petitioner No.2 was minor and he has attaine the age of majority i.e. 18 years on 5—8- 2004. Therefore, the respondent may be directed 'to consider petitione No.2 for compassionate appointm Respondent No.1rin its rep has submitted that as per the existin policy for compassionate appointm nt dated 28-2—2004, the dependants o those employees who died on ’l —11~2000 or thereafter, are entitled for compassionate appointment, theref re, the petitioners are not entitled for any reiief in this writ petition. i have heard learned counsel or the parties. it is admitted position that usband of petitioner No.1 and father o petitioner No.2 died on 11-349 in harness while working as Testin Assistant Grade-iii at Korba i.e. wit in the territory of the existing CSEB. A per the agreement of both the Sta es, the employees who were working in the territory of respective Eiectricity oards were allocated to those Electricity e i i r e . l g f f 9 g s XI—HC-22 EW,W,W Wm 1W anésr WWW \ - WW§WW Z Baams. Father of petiticner No.12 was working in the territory of CSEB, therefore, the liability of compassianate appointment of the dependants of Late Anii Singh iies on the shoul ers of CSEB. As the case of petitioner No.1 was rejected on the ground t at she was over age and petitioner No.2, son of Late Anii Singh, has attain d the age of majority on 5-8-2004 and in the matter of compassionate app intment the case of minor children are jor, therefore, the reply of CSEB that C$EB came into existence on 1 41—2000, as s’uch. the dependants of empioyees who died on or after 1 -1 1-2000‘ are entitied for compassionate appointment is arbitrary. it is t_ e responsibility of C$EB that even the empioyees who died before 15-11-2000, that is the date of coming into existence of CSEB, dependan of such employees are entitled for compassionate appointment on th ground that as per the decision of Union of lndia which has been referred t in W.P.No.1 126f2003 (order dated 20-6- 2006), the division of employees shaii be made terntory wise. Petitioner No.2's father was working in the te ritory of CSEB, as such, petitioner No.2 is entitled for consideration of appoin ment on compassionate ground. Even the State of Chhattisgarh, which came nto existence on 1-1 1—2000 under the MP. Reorganisation Act, 2000, has deci ed that the dependants of those employees who died on or after 1-1 1-1 997 shal be eligible for consideration of appointment on compassionate ground. Therefore, respondent No1 is directed to consider the case of the policy dated 28-2-2004, of course satisfying the eligibility criteria, on iling application by petitioner No.2 within a period of one month from today. With the direction aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of. // / considered when they become petitioner No.2 in accordance wi /, // / W%y%§%w ‘ a t