\@K\L~M\\4 ; IN:THE HIGE COURT OF JUDICAEURE AE BILASPUR (C.GI) Cy&w§© m. New Lg 6/2004/ \JAf}{ _3E% P. Janki Ramchandra Rao ; aged about 34 years S/o Late P. Paidayya R/o ‘Surya Kant Niwas' Gandhi Nagar, Kosanala, Bhilai Nagar, District-Durg (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS l. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department of Energy D.K.S, Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Chhattisgarh State Electricity Through its—Ghairman~é§;%;9°q ’nuL$£UU53’ Board _“% ‘ _ 3. - Dangania, Raipur (C.G.) mod.L&.s Vex Jaw. cmémé‘gvm MW norm/t W 3\~o€;- oz,“ °&t°"\ Qvwsh UWYaN , \awCa‘ED ’ / 6 "Q% l ' w ‘ w \\ L.AN INuTHE HIGH COURT OF JUDICA E I PET ITIONER QL"‘Qg Ax \\_¥¥_U4 W U) \‘ El 3‘; ELA § W Lag JrAL.Ag ‘ 4 \_‘ \\ tiaawa rPx-adeah 'Eieatri¢lty Board, wwwu xit$ :seeretary $1akti EhaWan Wtp §ab31pux €“.?y’ ._ “$. waion at 3 whmuglw we $e¢£etary §®amemv gggsfgpggw we wwea, Raw 3g 4a t‘c‘amk‘cx; Viriig’x g °&"°"\ Lvwx‘xsh \U ”WWW? A \ " g wma {" o. v A‘ A mTL‘TLLmIDWAM—AIF Vi V’ q‘ ma; § 9 mmm WM§WW %aa%mn%w 11 —7«‘2Q$6 Mr. Anand Pandey, counsei for-Vine pe‘ri‘iioner. Mr. AS. Kachhawaha, Govt Aavocafe for The 5?a+e/respon&enf No.1. Mr. AS. Gaharwar‘ wifh Mr. E’awan Shrivasfava, counsei for- respondenf No.2. Mr. Vivek Verma, ccunsel for- r-espondem- No.3. Mr. SK. Eeriwal, Cemrai 65W. Counsei'for responden‘r No.4. By This wrif pe‘rifioh under A pefificner has prayed for dived-ion fhe pe‘;i+ioner for compassionafe ap 3-2002 and 28-2-2004. is ma? his fumer Lafe P. Paidayya was The case of fhe pefmoner‘ working as A'Hendan'l' Grade-II in Workshop Division, Bhiici-3, bur-9 and he died in harness on 18-40-1998. On T “ride 226 of 'H'ae Cons?ifu+ion of India, +he responder}? No.2 ta consider The case of Daim'men‘r and quash fhe circuiars dwed 1— e demise of his fai’her, The peiifioner submi’r‘reu‘ an appiica‘iion for compas iorm-e appoim-mem' 1o rhe ersfwhiie MPEB (Annexure P-4) on 19—11v199& How ver, firm? apolicoi'ion remain pending and no finui decision was #aken. In the me nfime, on accoun‘i of reorganisa‘i'ion of the 51am of Madhyo Prodesh with ffed from 1-11-2000, MPEB was also bifurcded w.e.f. 1541-2000 and f om fhaf dafe CSEB came inio exis‘rence. Thereaffar, The new poiicy dafed 2 -2-2004 was formulafed by CSEB. As per fhe reply of C5EB, fhe case of fhe pefinoner has nof been considered on “ihe ground fha‘i as p r‘fhe policy dofed 28—2-2004, dependants of those employees who died o or offer 15-11-2000 are enfi'l'ied for compassionai-e appoin?ment (noW) f—we‘ XI—HC-22 H‘W, whim—gr,W mm Wm - wx>2w¢l m mam WWW ‘ Z, WWEWW mm é?aa%wawté¥r ‘In para 10 of The reply of res pondenf No.3 MPEB, i1- has been mentioned i‘ha‘? on forma‘i‘ion of CSEB The case of fhe pefi‘rioner has been fransferr-ed fo CSEB an 22-1-2002, wherein fhe pe'rifioner's name appears a1- ser'ial No.48‘ I have heard learned counsei r 'rhe parfies. o I Under sub-secfion (4) of 5 cfion 58 of fhe MP. §eorganisa+ion Acf 2000, fhe assei-s and liabimies an emoioyees of undivided Board are To be Vide Order dafed 6“ January, 2004, Government of India, Minisiry of P wer, issued an order in which if has been meni-ioned fha‘i' represen‘iafives of ofh i'he Siafes agreed in a meefing faken by The Secrefary (Power) on 20m ch, 2003, fhaf fhe division of empioyees would be in iine wifh policy ad fed for division of employees of MP Government In para 2’ if has b en men'i'ioned fhai‘ i'he mafi‘er has been (considered and in parfial modifica on of provisionai order dafed 12“” April, 2001, so far as relai-ing fa fhe divis‘ n of employees if has been decided finally fo divide fhe posfs and employees o fhe lines followed by DOPT for allocafion of posf and employees of The S'rai' Governmenf of ers‘rwhile Madhya Pradesh for making ailoca‘i‘ion of pos'l's and ersons To fhe successor Eleci‘ricii‘y Board of MPEB on fhe principle fhaf pas s relafable To ferriforial jurisdicfion of a successor Sfafe may be alloH-ed fo respecfive Sfa’res and similarly employees belonging To such sub Sfa‘ie ferr ial cadres being alloca'l'ed fo concerned Sfa'i'e and only dividing fhe remain n9 posfs and employees befween fhe fwo Sfa‘ies, The Governmen? of India decided To appoinT a 3 members STaTe Advisory CommiTTee To be headed b The same person who was The Chairman of SAC appoinTed by DOPT for Madhy Pradesh. Therefore, on This principle The (@W) r i r s g‘ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XI—HC-22 3aW, m;W c (a? x div l L / mm iri