‘4 IN THE HIGH COURT BILASPUR Qj—IHATTISGARH W. P. No.6{éék OF 2006 PETITIONER N661“ Singh Maravi Late Ratiram Maravi, about 25 years, Occup Unemployed, R U’tarda, Block 4 Pali, Distt. Korba (C.G.) VERSUS n" I: n“ OJ State of Chhattisgarh,/ through Collector (Tribal Development) Bilaspur, (C. G.) The Commissioner// Assistant Commissioner (tribal Development), Bilaspur (C. G.) The Pi‘iiicipal, Gurukul Vidhyalaya Pendra Road, District Bilaspur (C. G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226% OF THE CONSTITUTION OFVINDIA ‘ ${WLEBEMH @ @ OF JUDICATURE AT / S/o. aged ation /o. Village — 927 / @ HIGH C®URT OF JUDECATURE CHEATE‘ISGARH: BILASPUR Single Eemch: Hon’ble Sin-i Satish K. Agnihotri, J. W. P. (s) N0. 6664- of 2006 Petitioner : Near Singh Maravi Vm‘sus Raspondent Stats of ChhamSgarh 85 others Mr. Gallesh Prajapa’ri, Advecate for the peti‘fiener. @REER (Pa$$e& on thie 237d day of Fckytmjr, £2007) 1. According to learned counsei appearing for the petitioner, the father of the peu'tioner namely Rafi Ram Maravi, wae working as Waterman in the oiflce of the Principal, Government Gurukul School at Pendra Road, District Bilaspur, when he died on 3.2.2006 in harneSs. 2. The petitioner, being dependant—legal hair of the deceased, made an application for appointment on compassionate basis, which was rejected vide order dated 30.7.2006 (P/7) on the ground that the father of the petitioner was emnloyed on daily wages basis and as per the circular dated 10.6.2003, the dependant of the deceased employee, who was employed on daily wages basis, contract or ad hoe basis, their dependants are not entitled to consideration for appointment on compassionate basis. 2% "\ 3. I have heard leamsd counsel for tha petitioncr and upon perusal of the documents appended to the pleadings, it appears tha the t petitioner was appointed Vide order dated 15.4.87 (P/S) as Peon on contingency fund at Collector’s rate for a pen'od of 89 days. Thereafter, vide order dated 5.11.88 (W6), the father of the petitioner was appointed at Middle at Middle Chodha, Pa}i, merger ofthe Hostel Pasan, village—Uprora. 4. Admittedly, appointment of the father of the petitioner was not in accordance with law. Thus, the petitioner has no right to consideration for appointment on death of his father, who himself has no right to the post as his appointment was not legal. x} / o. Be that as it may, the State Government may consider the facts of the case in the light of the circular dated 211d Februaiy, 2006 issued by the Government of Chhattisgarh for appointment on compassionate basis in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. 6. ln View ofthe foregoing, this petition is dismissed summarily. f Sd/ f Satish K.-Agnih0tri Judge Bablu l