€ €^ .IM;THE'mQH.:et:>tmT;!:OlS^^®ieii;t'tBEgfleTimi»AaPCR- WrttBatitioiaaro. ^3004 PETITIONER Knaxit.EeilSa^!'^ : : ; •'- 1 %&;£at;eiE^'ieffina1§hRatre, -Sged:is)3JoilM6:X®®'S>.':': ;©ccugatffiu|j-;lBiemployed ;':R/^,i3tfi|t^e|dRh|tt}iaa,',•• ::*!'ahstKgI^|apuiEi,-f^;'::'. '\\,, ' iaistnct-^^aigu'|(21aamlpa(G,G.) ^ ./^ 'Vetsiia— :.'::.' -'''" : • 1. : .•::^iState:|^|©H^iattiS^Kh •'f;s?y.::v '''f/*7.^" .^^.JF '^f^ys ,®evetiue_^--fe^/ ~J'^^::- : ^iff ; w^ RESPONDEIITS ; -:.' :.:D.;:K.':SlilUlaiwaii, ^;..|:: '• ..:, ;Ratpi-u'.i{E|. ,';:;: i2.::.;i^::;0allec;tag(^ ,^i: .tJgnjgT|©liai(l.par;t©. •<• *i WKET: :.PETITOW.: •i:taSi»:t,MaEcieS!Blitt2^igSi2S?SiaxMKii^i;JiaE; GOnsTTTia^t&st:^^^iSSiS81ilElligBj^il BSISUifflgTaEi@B; WRiT.;?dEm:^t;o®^liiBff^ii>^IIBigB!@!Si8EiSM^ MATTER.^ ^ : ^: '•' '' VWi:^ ':'::: ^..''Effi!" '^s -. g- jj: ^<JgEui®JJ@|La|B.pffJ©^^.^^ „?: t N n l> i- rii 'm :t1 Wtic-n ]<WTf7SI' K-u'h snSs", -^i-t?{^) •Mi?fl ^^ -S^l ''•IWM^.. ^.Wi6. wvtwyt UIKrli **4!*' .l-J..'.f;.../o.o.;.--z..c>..30/0' 'a^ 2c {sre^si' SITOI^trITWalOT 21-12-2005 Petitioner by Shri Vi'y^flj-) ? ci|vs^(-&j4, Advocate. Shri Vivek Sharma, PanelTawyer,! Heard. This case relates to compassion^te appointment consequent upon the death of an employee seMng in the State. Learned counsel for the petitione( [11-1997 and not earlier. !t is further submitted that the employee has occurred on or after 1-[1 .in batch ofcases bearingW.P. No.1322/^002 involving the sam.e question orders have been passed bythis Court on 20/12/2005. He' ()rays that similar ordere may be passed in this case also. Learned counsel forthe State doe of Chhattisgarh has taken a decision any gnevance still remains, the petitior) including filing ofthe petition before this ipourt. With the aforesaid observations, t|iis petition stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rutes. Copy to the State counsel, who| respondents for compliance. ^i^^^n ^iHdi' ^ 'f^st '^rerR ^? s'fiaTi SII^T for the State. categorieally stated that in this case, the death of . not dispute the above fact and state that the State to consider the cases of dependants of those employees who died on or after 1/11/19^7 strictly in accordance with the policy prevalent at that time. In view of the submissions macfe by learned counsel appearing for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the m^rits of the case, in the opinion of this Court,ends of justice will be served if a direction is giv^n to the State of Chhattisgarh and the authorities co.ncerned to consider and decide the cpse of the petitioner in accordance with the policy prevalent at the time of death of the err^ployee concerned. If the petitioner found eligible, appointment orders will be issued as esjrly as possible on or before 30 April, 2006. The petitioner is also directed to render due c(3-operation to the authorities. It is made clear that if er may avail the remedy available under the law will be obiiged to communicate the order to the ^ Sd/- Faklu'uddin. Judge. \ —-••——^^--- [Tft^^feq ^.^^s^-.'.- ,-.