^-^. ^. i^ S^^SSSSia^^^^ " f •^ 3T IN THE HIGH C'OURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR. WRIT PBTITION N0. 173^ OF 2004 / "I PETITIONER SANJAYYADAV, S/0. LATE VISHNU PRASAD YADAV, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/0. BEHIND OF RAJARAM MANDIR, NEAR ARPA RIVER, GONDPARA, BILASPUR (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS III'1 Hl;l 1 ^ /<w ^^^.^ ^^yy 1. ^- STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH: THE SECRETARY, ENERGY DEPARTMENT, D.K.S. BHAWAN RAIPUR, (C.G.) 2. CHHATTISGARH STATE ^ ELECTRICITY BOARD, P, - THROUGH: THE SECRETARY DANGANFfA, RAIPUR (C.G.). 3. MADHYA PRADESH ELECTRI- CITY 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 IWRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS/CBRTIORARI ETC. OR DIRECTION/ORDER IN THE LIKE NATURE ETC. ;;^;^,E,.—.:.-;.,£---, ^.w-' -A, <"^ Jf^ •'T 1..^ ^TVA ^A", \37. '^\ V ^: >• ^" y ,t?" -.A. ^ / .Y ^ ^y°" '^ ./^^/y^ -•>v R^sponden-fc K.o<3 ^8espondent no ^ 4<» ^^ p»^s^te Bl.:^t? z^ '•»'"a!\T,s,er^: ^tt Bha»an Jabalpur ".«>•"• Union of Xndia^ Shrough the Sesyefeary Ministry of Pea-sQnael 9 t»ublic Gri®yancesand Pension (State Se.^rganization Cell) , Third E'loor i,oX Nayak Shawan, Khan Market New Dellil .^"-.fl lAt^w \^ ^."'^::': '^. ^ \' XI-HC-78 ~ys( ^ww^, w^\ww, fs)dl^^< ^|t|^| sb*41cb ^^*^^^^^^^^ 3ll^l TSRT (^c<i^s|<^T) ^ 200 W^ToRTf^ri^ cT^T3:TT^?T$h^I<=b ^cTTW ^rfgcf W^T cbi^I<n<fl'i ^ii^^il ^f^tii^^K ^3ri^T3T^T 6-7-2006 Mr. Rakesh Pandey, counse! f4r the petitioner. Miss Deepaii Pondey, Panel Loi^yer for the State/respondent No.l. AAr. A.S. &aharwar, Advocojte, with AArs. Rita Holder, counsei for respondent No.2. Mr. Vivek Verma, counsei for 'espondent No.3. Mr. S.K. Beriwai, Central ©ov1^.Counsei for respondent No.4. By this writ petition under Ar|l-ic!e 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has proyed that the case of the petitioner for compassio^ate appointment. The cose of the petitioner is respondents be dlrected to consider the that his father Late Vishnu Prasad Yadav WQS working as Lineman under respc^ndent No.2, who died in harness on 22-12- 1998. Copy of the deQth £ertifical|e is Annexure P-2. The petitioner herein appiied for compcsssionate oppoin^ment on 17-4-1999, his appiicQtion wos registered as No.CE/BR/COW/WO-f494 and the same was forwarded to the 5E, Rciipur at serial No.48. The peti|-ioner approached the respondents and his QppiicQtion was pending at Raipur ti|! 2001. He made representation on 23-2- 2004, copy of the same is Annexufe P-4. The case of the petitioner is not being considered on the 9round thaf as per the policy dated 28-2-2004/ CSEB Is considering the coses of depender|ts of those employees who died on or after 15-11-2000, for compa^sionate oppo per the poiicy dated 28-2-2004 on! died on or after 28-2-2004 are enti^led for compassioncte Qppointment. Intment. In the repiy filed on behalf ^f the CSEB it has been mentioned that as \/ the dependents of those employees who XI-HC-78 7S[ ^|<q|0-q, fflTfl^^Ko, (c|dl^^< +11*1^11 St»*1ich ^ 200 A^s 3ll^l ^flth (l{<=l^s<<^T) 3TT^T^)T^i<+) cTS:|T3:TT^T$h^|ch ^IB^ ?^TTW:^fN'^?T I have heard learned counsel been considered in the iight of th^ CM<<[ci^Ti ^i^<nT^'teI:^'<r3|^.i< ^3Tf^T3TT^T for the porties. It is admitted position that fhe petitioner's father died on 22-12-1998 whiie he was working as LinemQn anp the petitioner appiied for compossionQte appointment on 17-4-1999. Therefojr rcorganisation of the State andt re, the case of the petitioner ouaht to hove existing policy dated 30 Januctry, 1997. The 9round tcsken by CSEB is that ip- came into existence on 15-11-2000 ofter bctsed on sound recisonings for tl that cut of date has been token for consideration of compassionate apj^ointment. But this stand of CSEB is not reason thot in the meeting dated 20,th March, 2003, rcpresentatives of bo|-h the States agreed before the Secretary (Power) that the division of empioye^s of MPEB shall be on the lines foliowed by DOPT for aiiocation of posts andj employees of the State ©overnmentof erstwhiie AAadhya Pradesh for mak ng aIJocQtion of post^ Qnd per^ons to the successor Electricity Board of MP^B on the principle that posts reIatQble to territorid jurisdiction of Q succe^sor State may be csiiotted to respective States and similariy empioyees beic^ belng GiiocGted to the concerned St in the terntoriai jurisdiction of the| policy, even though CSEB was creat ngi^ ^° suc^ ^ub-State territorioil cadres |ite. As the petitioner's father was working newiy created CSEB, therefore, the above ^d on 15-11-20CX), it is the responsibility of CSEB to consider the case of Gppoin|i-ment of those empioyees who died prior to 15-11-2000 subject to their worl Jurj^diction of C5EB. The petition ^ing ond residence under the territorioi kr's case satisfies the above condition ond the appiication of the petitioner is ^dd to bc pending ot Raipur, as per the iist signed by MPEB. ^^•^ XI-HC-78 3^T ^I^ICl^, ^TTl^ll<o, fs1<ni<Hy CL>. W^n'awraT**^**^*'*4^^/** ^ 200^ 311^1 ^5<cn OT^T^Tf^TW cW3TT^TshHl<=h \..-._ -' Soma h^. /<< '^ 5^T^K^f??rW^T ^l- In the circumstances, the re^l of the petitioner for compossionat€|Qppointment of 1997, when the father of the pet|tioner VVith the directionctforesaid, Parties are entitled for certil <=bi^^41Ti ^i^<nT^fel:^t'<Ri^i< ^<yrf^T3TI^T pondents are directed to consider the case in accordance with the policy tioner died. the petition stands disposed of. •ied copy of this order. —- —— Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge ( ^ ^r <\^ ^ ..^? AN/ /.VA/\^ -\^\^ ^ ^/^v$^4^<^ '/^V^/^y ^•^^^'^ ^) ^