C^ }t S.B. (Service Matter) IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARHAT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) WRIT PETITION (S) NO.?,6)tT/2011. PETITIONER: \\.'^i Respondents ^W!/ ^w ^iyy-^''p^'' ^/y-7 Smt.Bhot Bai, wife of Lafe Hariram Purena, aged about 32 years, residence of Charched Post Pisid, Block Kasdole, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretaiy, Panchayat and Social Welfare Department, D.K.S.Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ,* 9^C^A^? 2.^ChiefExecutive Officer, Janpad /^ / Panchayat, Kasdole, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ^ 3. Principal, Govt. Primary School, Deorikhurd, Block Kasdole, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA The petidoner most humbly begs to submit as luider: - ^ 1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER: As mentioned in the Cause title. siwqw d-=r •<<i-i)ici<<, 0Tily;i(o, f^fray i-o-f:>-(£)t<JC"cstsi^i( SSW 'q^RF ('^?f3^8?) WilW^iftffaii^i t<tl°ni" f-ilt ^itutl«if, SB : Hon'bleShri Manindra Iviohlan Shrivastava. J \fras 1646-2011 Shri C.J.K. Rao, counsei Shri Y.S. Thakur, State/respondents 1 and 3 on The grievance of the peti| is that respondent No.2 has for compassionate appointmejit husband ofthe petitionerwho in Primary School, Devrikhurc) learned counsel for the petitio|ier appointment was submitted However, the said application It is submitted that as therel compassionateappointment, thf the deceased employee, is iiabl) Submission of learned and documents placed on rdp petifioner died while in servicje. appointment having been obligation to consider and takej policy of compassionate establishment of respondent Nd.2. mafle ^)!6ffet'^ht 'ITO^f "^ ts^ <R>i^f< ^siignsi^i for the petitioner. qeputy Advocate General for the apvance copy. •titioner as ventilated through this petition taken any decision on the application submitted by the petitioner. The working as Shiksha Karmi Grade-lli died on 26/8/08. It Is submifted by that application for compassionate i^efore respondent N6.3 on 12/12/08. tjias remained pending without decislon. exists policy of the Govemment for i^ case of the petitioner, who is widow of l^ to be considered. c(iunsel for the petitioner and pleadings ;ord shows that the husband of the icje. The application for compassionate the respondent No.2 is under an 1 decision <»consistent with the existlna as may be applteable in the appofntment, -FS/140—2/2011—1,50,000. + "'SWK ^S? "41'41<D<4, »Tlly<!&, f^cliy^< ^.a.,.....10.;.?.:...^..1^.;..3.'?.!^/^ 3TT^T 'CRST (•^qf^sf^sr) Tam^ftHan^i 'qn^irttl-i KWd! "S fs^t tfSR^! '^affwsn^B Accordingly, respdnaenfINo3Ts^Trectea to aeciae tne appiication of the petitioner for compas^onate appointment, within four months from the date of receipt of cop\| It is made clear that this! of this order. Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. With the aforesaid obs^rvations, the petifion is finaily disposed off. Dsepit Sd-/ Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge