f'?-SV{;M ^^1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. "-?-9 °> /2011 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS ^^ ^p- ; Uraa Devi Das D/o. late Shri Shivnandan Das Mahant, aged about 31 years, R/o. Village Kevari, P.S. and Tahsil Lakhanpur, District Surguja (C.G.). VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, Panchayat and Social Welfare Departn-ient, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). 2. Director, Panchayat and Social Welfare, Raipur (C.G.), 3. Deputy Director, District Office, Panchayat and Social Welfare, Disfa-ict Jashpur (C.G.). 4. Collector, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G-), 5. Chief Executive OfGcer, Janpad Panchayat Bagicha, District Jashpur (C.G), WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER ^> A§mentioned above in the cause title. ^/ mOH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER WRIT PETITION (S) No. 799 of2011 Uma Devi Das. RESPONDENTS VERSUS State ofChhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Aenihotri,JL Present: Shri Atanu Ghosh, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Y.S.Thakur, Deputy Advocate General for the State/ respondent No. 1 to 4. ORDER fORAL) (Passed on 29th day ofMarch, 2011) The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate basis on the ground that her father died on 15.03.1997 in hamess, while working as Gram Sahayak, at Janpad Panchayat, Bagicha, Disb-ict Jashpur. The petitioner, thereafter, made an application on 14.02.2007 which was rejected by the Director, Panchayat & Social Welfare, Chhattisgarh, vide communication dated 20.02.2009 (Annexure P/5), addressed to the Deputy Director, Panehayat and Social Welfare, Jashpur. Shri Thakur, leamed Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State/respondent No. 1 to 4 submits that the father ofthe petitioner died way back on 15.03.1997 and thereafter, the application was made after a period'of 10 years. Thus, the need ofdependent ofthe deceased employee had also come to an end. Even otherwise, the compassionate appointment can be made only in consonance with the policy of the State Govemment. The State policy does not '% ff^/;'. -^<?"-.-r:^tf^< ^ ttf^ j *sSS3^ | ''•K ^/ ,^-v 2 provide for consideration of a case of any dependent of the deceased employee, who had died before 01.11.1997. Heard leamed counsel appearing for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto, it is indisputable that the father of the petitioner died on 15.03.1997. It is clearly provided in the policy dated 02.02.2006 that only the dependents of those deceased employee who had died between 01.11.1997 to 31.10.2000 can be considered, ifthey make an application within a period ofthree years. In the instant case, fhe petitioner fails on both the ground, firstly, the employee died before 01.11.1997 and secondly, the application for grant of compassionate appointment was made after a period of 10 years. The State of Chhattisgarh came into existence on 01.11.2000. Thereafter, by circular dated 02.02.2006, it was decided by the State Govemment that a person who had died on or after 01.11.1997 may be considered for appointment on compassionate basis. In the instant case, the employee died on 15.03.1997 before fhe cut offdate. Thus, the application ofthe petitioner was rejected being not in consonarice with the policy ofthe State Govemment. In light of the above and for the reasons stated hereinabove, the writ petition is bereft ofmerit and is accordingly dismissed. No order asto costs. Satish K. Agaihotri Judge Amlt .»—.,•^^'-'^