‘ ‘ I Q w WRIT pETITION UNDER ARTxCLEs 226/227 OF TI~IE \ CONSTITUTION OF INDIA A, ‘ CWW/ IN TI‘E HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (CG) wRIT pETiTION N0.E2§7 OF 2003 BETWEEN Manesh Kumar Ramtake S/o Late shri Tej Lal Ramtake, , aged about 28 years, reSident of Indra.Ward No¢3, J Ke§ar Badi Dongargarh district Rajnandgaom (CG). \ PETITIONER “65%“... ...‘. 1., The $tate of Chhattisgarh, é‘e Through the secretary Department of Agriculture, Mantralay, D.K§S.Building,Raipur Tehsil and mistrict Raipur (CG). 2c The Director, Krishi Department ,Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Tehsil and District Raipurg g 3o The Deputy Director, Agriculture, Rajnancgaon, District Rajnana‘gaon (CG). 4. The Collector, Rajnandgaon (CG). . i Q* ‘ RESPONDENTS W” ‘ // XI—HC—22 ‘2 1 . 1 1 . 2003 Petitioner by Shri Awadh Tripathi, Advocat. e Shri Ranbir Singh, Govt. AdvocatE takes notice on behalf of the Rcspondents, Th6 petitioxmr has phefcrrad Tins petltlon ,under Artlcle 226/ 227 of the Constitution (If Indla bemg aggneved by the maenon on the part of the Responde s No. l and - for not cons1dermg 1113 case for compassionate appo' tment. t the father of’the petitioner namely Tej Lal Ramtake was working as Agriculture Development Officer in Agriculture Ofhce, Dongarg h, District—Rajnandgaon.. During the service he expired on 8‘42 00, copy of the death certificate is _ Annexure P/l. The petiti ner submitted an application for gh proper channel and the same was recommended by the Re pondents No. 2 and 3. Vide letter dt. 5.2.2001 the Respondent No.3 directed the petitioner to attend the camp of Collector, Rajnandg on on 22.2.2001 for consideration of his case. Vide letter dated 2 2.2001 the petitioner was intimated. that his application for com assionate appointment has been sent to the appropriate authority But since then no reply has been received, although the Colle r and Deputy Director had intimated , the petitioner that his apptication is under consideration. The petitioner is duly qualified but the respondents are not giving compassionate appointment 1o him, therefore they may be directed to give compassionate appoiniment to the petitioner. V The petitioner’s case is compassionate appointment n. «f/ £l \\ 7 a u c o XI—HC—22 mm ", m ' I have‘ hgard leam6d c Learned counsel for 't the petiu'onar is fully eh'gibk ‘ the Rulcs and Guiddincs 1 Govt. from time to Tim) R€Spond€nts No. 2 and 3 1 even then he has not appointment. Therefore, the detailed replesentation and _ consider and decide the sari no objection. Having heard leaner regard to the facts and Ci ounsel for the parties. he petitioner submits that even though t for compassionate appointment as per ssued in this connection by the State accordingly, heagapplied and the :ecommended the case of the petitioner ’b’een considered for compassionate petitioner may be allowed to make a : the respondents may be directed to Ze, for which learned Govt. Advocate has 4: L counsel for the parties and having ‘ tances of the case the petitioner is \ I allowed to make a detailed presentation within a period of 10 days nom today to the Respon ‘ent No.2 who in turn will decide the representation within a pend of 2 months from the date of receipt oft the representation in objective manner considering all the contents of the representa 'on by passing a reasoned order and intimate the petitioner about the decision taken by the respondents. With the above observations this petition is disposed of finally. Parties are entitled for certified copy of this order. f Sdl- [’— PileW mmawm ammo: L.C.BHA$00 Judge r e s