Partly allowed¶24

Rajeev Diwan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Compassionate appointment – Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC8 Jan 2024WPS/2901/2019

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur; WPS No. 2901 of 2019; Rajeev Diwan v. State of Chhattisgarh; Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey; order dated 09.01.2024; compassionate appointment of legal heir of missing Assistant Teacher; civil death declaration; C.S. No. 83-A/2011; Civil Appeal No. 141-A/2014; legal heirs certificate issued by Collector, Raipur; rejection by District Education Officer set aside; fresh consideration within 90 days.

What did the court decide?

The order of the District Education Officer rejecting the compassionate-appointment application was set aside; the respondents were directed to consider the petitioner's case afresh within an outer limit of 90 days, taking into consideration the certificate of legal representatives issued by the Collector, Raipur. ¶24

Rajeev Diwan Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the rejection of the petitioner's application for compassionate appointment calls for interference, given that the civil-death decree and the certificate of legal representatives were issued only after the application was moved.

¶14

Court's answer

Since the petitioner now holds the judgment and decree declaring civil death as well as a legal heirs certificate issued by the Collector, the authorities are directed to consider his case for compassionate appointment afresh in light of the subsequent development.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

The order passed by the District Education Officer rejecting the compassionate-appointment application is set aside (printed in the set-aside paragraph as dated 28.04.2015; described elsewhere in the judgment as dated 28.04.2017).

¶24

Key takeaways

The respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's case afresh within an outer limit of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶24
The certificate declaring legal representatives issued by the Collector, Raipur shall be taken into consideration by the authorities for compassionate appointment.ratio¶24
The petitioner ought to have approached the authorities for compassionate appointment after obtaining the requisite documents such as the judgment and decree and the certificate of legal representatives.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Compassionate appointment - Chhattisgarh - petitioner, son of Assistant Teacher Ramesh Kumar Diwan missing since 11.07.2001 - civil death declared by the IVth Additional District Judge, Raipur in Civil Appeal No. 141-A/2014 vide judgment and decree dated 18.12.2015 (earlier suit C.S. No. 83-A/2011 having been dismissed on 31.07.2014) - Collector, Raipur issued certificate declaring wife, daughter and son as legal heirs - petitioner's application for compassionate appointment, moved before the decree, was rejected by the District Education Officer, Raipur vide order dated 28.04.2017 (Annexure-P/1) for want of proper documents - Held: rejection order set aside; authorities to consider the case afresh within 90 days in light of the judgment and decree and the legal-heirs certificate (Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J.).

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPS No. 2901 of 2019

¶5

Rajeev Diwan S/o Ramesh Kumar Diwan Aged About 22 Years R/o Village - Akoli, Mandhar, Block Dharsinwa, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District: Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Atal Nagar, Mantralaay, New Raipur Chhattisgarh., District: Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶8

2. The Director Directorate Of Public Instructions Chhattisgarh, Raipur Chhattisgarh., District: Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶9

3. The District Education Officer Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶10

---- Respondents

¶11

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------For Petitioner : Mr. D. N. Prajapati, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Dinesh Tiwari, Govt. Advocate.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶13

0 9.01.2024

¶14

1 . The petitioner has filed this petition against the rejection of his application for compassionate appointment dated 28.04.2017 by the District Education Officer, Raipur vide Annexure-P/1.

¶15

2 . Facts of the present case are that the father of the petitioner, namely, Mr. Ramesh Kumar Diwan was working on the post of Assistant Teacher under the respondents and he was missing since 11.07.2001. He remained missing for a considerable period, thereafter, the mother of the petitioner filed a civil suit before the learned VIIIth Additional Civil Judge Class-II, Raipur bearing C.S. No. 83-A/2011 to declare his civil death as he was not found or heard by any person alive for more than seven years. The civil suit was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 31.07.2014. An appeal was preferred before the learned IVth Additional District Judge, Raipur bearing Civil Appeal No. 141-A/2014 and the same was allowed vide judgment and decree dated 18.12.2015. The Collector,

¶16

¶17

Raipur issued a certificate mentioning legal representatives in pursuance of the judgment and decree passed by the I Vth Additional District Judge, Raipur declaring Mrs. Shakuntala Diwan (wife), Ms. Shalini Diwan (daughter) and Mr. Rajeev Diwan (son) as legal heirs of the late Mr. Ramesh Kumar Diwan. The petitioner, who is the legal heir (son) of the late Ramesh Kumar Diwan had applied for compassionate appointment prior to the judgment and decree dated 18.12.2015 and in the absence of a proper certificate, his application for compassionate appointment was rejected by the District Education Officer, Raipur vide order dated 28.04.2017, Annexure-P/1.

¶18

3 . Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is eligible and qualified to be appointed against sanctioned and vacant post. He would further argue that the father of the petitioner was posted on the vacant and sanctioned post of Assistant Teacher, therefore according to the policy of the State Government, respondent No. 3 ought to have considered the case for compassionate appointment. It is also argued that respondent No. 3 has committed an illegality in dismissing the application moved by the petitioner.

¶19

4 . Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the relevant certificate was issued in favour of the petitioner after he had already moved the application before respondent No. 3, therefore, his case could not be considered in proper perspective. He would further submit that if the petitioner submits a fresh representation along with judgment and decree and certificate declaring legal representatives issued by the Collector, Raipur, his representation would be considered strictly in accordance with law.

¶20

5 . I have heard learned counsel appearing for parties and perused the documents placed on record.

¶21

6 . Upon the meticulous perusal of the documents, it is apparent that the father

¶22

¶23

of the petitioner was missing from 11.07.2001, following which a civil suit was filed by the petitioner’s mother which ultimately resulted in judgment and decree being passed in her favour and civil death of petitioner’s father was declared by the IV th Additional District Judge, Raipur vide judgment and decree dated 18.12.2015. Thereafter, a certificate was issued in favour of the wife of the late Ramesh Kumar Diwan and her two children. A representation for the compassionate appointment was moved by the petitioner prior to the passing of the aforesaid judgment and decree and issuance of the certificate, therefore his application was rejected by respondent No. 3. The petitioner ought to have approached the authorities for the compassionate appointment after getting the requisite documents like judgment and decree and certificate of legal representatives . Though the District Education Officer rejected the application moved by the petitioner in the absence of any proper document, now the petitioner has judgment and decree in his favour as well as a legal heirs certificate issued by the Collector, therefore, the authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment afresh in light of subsequent development.

¶24

7 . Accordingly, the order passed by the District Education Officer dated 28.04.2015 is hereby set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner afresh within an outer limit of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The certificate declaring legal representatives issued by the Collector, Raipur shall be taken into consideration by the authorities for compassionate appointment.

¶25

Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶26

Ajinkya

Rajeev Diwan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajeev Diwan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramesh Kumar Rawal and Ors. Vs Himmat Lal Rawal and Ors.

Suman Krishna Haldhar Vs Smt. Sheela Haldhar

Pushpraj Sadhu Vs (Deleted) India Church Council of the Disciples of Christ

Pradeep Kumar Sonkar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ku. Shabana Nisha Rani Vs Smt. Rama Bai

Prince Kumar Gupta Vs Central Bank of India