Disposed

Sanjeev Kumar Khandey v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC9 Mar 2021WPS/1004/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Life of Justices V. Chaturvedi Smt. Rohini Mukherjee Vs Union of India | WP(C) 510 of 2011 The petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment was not rejected by respondents. Petitioner directed respondent no. 4 to take a decision on compassionate appointment claim. Disposal. Cure within 90 days. Dispose. Writ dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed respondent no. 4 to take a decision on compassionate appointment claim within 90 days.

Sanjeev Kumar Khandey Vs State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Chhattisgarh HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

Writ Petition (S) No. 1004 of 2021

¶5

Sanjeev Kumar Khandey S/o Shri Makhan Lal Khandey, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Village And Post Kathakoni, Tehsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Social Services, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶9

2. Collector, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

3. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

4. Chief Executive Officer, Jila Panchayat, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

¶12

---- Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner For State

¶14

: Mr. Abhishek Sinha, Advocate : Mr. Amit Buxy, P.L.

¶15

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board

¶16

09.03.2021

¶17

1. The claim of the petitioner is for grant of compassionate appointment on the death of his wife who died in harness on 27.04.2014.

¶18

2. According to the petitioner, his wife working on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-II {Teacher (Panchayat)} died in harness on 27.04.2014 and since then the petitioner has been approaching the respondents continuously but no avail. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the claim of the petitioner was also scrutinized by the respondents and the respondents 3 & 4 have reached to the conclusion that the petitioner is

¶19

¶20

eligible for grant of compassionate appointment yet the order of appointment has till date not been issued.

¶21

3. Given the aforesaid factual matrix of the case, considering the fact that the claim of the petitioner till date has not been rejected by the respondents and there is an averment of the petitioner that the respondent no.4 has found the petitioner eligible for compassionate appointment, the writ petition at this juncture stands disposed of directing the respondent no.4 to take an appropriate decision so far as the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment is concerned at the earliest, preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶22

4. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

¶23

Sd/P. Sam Koshy Judge

¶24

Khatai

Sanjeev Kumar Khandey v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjeev Kumar Khandey v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajeshwar Rao Kridat Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kapil Dew Bhagat Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Deepesh Kumar Pandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lakhan Lal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Vidya Anant Vs the Assistant General Manager ( P P G )

Kantiranjan Rathore Vs State of Chhattisgarh