Smt. Geeta Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Forest And Climate Change, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Minor Forest Produce (Trading And Development) Co-Operative Federation Ltd., Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

3 - The Divisional Forest Officer (Dfo) Dhamtari Forest Division, DistrictDhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

¶11

4 - The Manager Prathmik Vanopaj Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Sankra, DistrictDhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

¶12

		... Respondent(s)
For Petitioner	:	Ms. AnushreeMishra,Advocate
For State	:	Ms. Apoorva Nigam, P.L.
For RespondentNo.	2 :	Mr. AshutoshSingh Kachhwaha,Advocate

¶13

HON'BLE SHRI PARTH PRATEEM SAHU, JUDGE

¶14

ORDER ON BOARD

¶15

04.05.2026

¶16

1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:

¶17

“10.1) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the petitioner from the possession of the respondents for its kind perusal.

¶18

10.2) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent Nо. 4 concerning the Petitioner's application dated

¶19

2 / 2

¶20

08.09.2023 for compassionate appointment.

¶21

10.3) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to Issue a writ of mandamus for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 22.11.2022 (Ref. No. 4278) issued by the respondent no. 4, as it is arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to the principles of social welfare and natural justice.

¶22

10.4) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondent authority to grant compassionate appointment to the Petitioner without further delay, considering the 34 years of continuous, unblemished service rendered by her late husband. 10.5) Any other relief or relief(s) which this Hon'ble Court may think proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted.”

¶23

2. At the outset, counsel for the petitioner submits that she may be permitted to submit a fresh representation, for redressal of grievance as prayed for in this petition before respondent No. 2 and 3 and direction be issued to respondent No. 2 and 3 to consider and take decision on the representation, at the earliest.

¶24

3. Counsel for respondent No. 2 submits that as petitioner is not pressing this writ petition on merits and is only seeking a direction to consider the representation before respondent for engaging her as daily wage employee, he is having no objection to the limited prayer.

¶25

4. On due consideration of submission of counsel for the respective parties, without entering into merits of this case, the writ petition at this stage is disposed of permitting petitioner to submit fresh representation and in the event such representation is submitted, respondent No. 2 & 3 are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, in accordance with law, expeditiously preferably within a further period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of order passed by this Court along with pending representation.

¶26

5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

( Parth Prateem Sahu ) JUDGE

¶29

Saurabh

Smt. Geeta Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Geeta Yadav 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

Raghunandan Prasad Joshi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mohammed Mustakeem Vs Amitabh Mukharjee

Prabhu Lal Markam Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ram Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mukesh Kumar Baghel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Amrit Shende Vs State of Chhattisgarh