Justice after 20 years: High Court orders compassionate appointment

With this decision of Chhattisgarh High Court, the petitioner has got true justice only after 20 years. In fact, the petitioner was tired of visiting the offices of top officers of the police department for the last 20 years. There was disappointment everywhere. Before giving compassionate appointment, the department required succession certificate. Due to this one problem the petitioner was feeling disappointed. After hearing the case, the High Court has canceled the letter issued by the police department to the petitioner regarding production of succession certificate. The court has directed the DGP and Bilaspur SP that the case of compassionate appointment of the petitioner should be resolved as per the rules without the succession certificate.

what is the matter

Sikandar Khan, resident of Kapil Nagar Sarkanda, Chhattisgarh Bilaspur, had filed a petition in the High Court through advocate Abdul Wahab Khan. The petitioner had told that his father Late. Shivkumar Sahu was posted as constable in the office of Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur. He died while in service on 26 March 2004. The petitioner told the court that his mother Razia Begum, being the wife of the deceased, was getting family pension. In connection with the payment of various items deposited in the account of the deceased, he, his mother Razia Begum and other heirs had also obtained the succession certificate. The petitioner has also informed in his petition that the relatives have not lodged any objection regarding getting the compassionate appointment. Everyone has also given their consent. Even after this the department is asking for succession certificate from him. Due to non-production of the certificate, he is being denied compassionate appointment. The case was heard in the single bench of Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey. After hearing the case, Justice Pandey has said in his important decision that there is no compulsion of succession certificate in relation to compassionate appointment. Asking for such a certificate is against the law. Canceling the order by the police department asking for succession certificate to the petitioner, the DGP and Bilaspur SP have been directed to follow the departmental procedure for giving compassionate appointment to the petitioner.

Read this also…

Caste certificate controversy: Chhattisgarh High Court cancels the order of Caste Scrutiny Committee

Chhattisgarh High Court has given an important decision regarding the validity of the caste certificate and the work and authority of the Caste Scrutiny Committee. Canceling the order of the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee, under the guidelines of the Supreme Court, the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee has been ordered to verify the caste certificate of the petitioner within six months of the receipt of the order. The Court has also remarked that the Caste Inquiry Committee has to function as a quasi-judicial authority, which is required not only to follow the principles of natural justice, but also to treat every material collected by it as relevant to the person. It is also necessary to disclose before whom the investigation is being conducted.

The petitioner Lakshmi Narayan Mahato has questioned the order passed on 9 January 2015 by the High Powered Caste Scrutiny Committee (hereinafter referred to as the Committee) by which the caste certificate issued by the Divisional Organizer, Raipur dated 6 February 1982 in favor of the petitioner was canceled by saying that It has been canceled that the petitioner had obtained the said caste certificate of Scheduled Tribe (ST) by submitting documents related to Gadaria caste, which belongs to Other Backward Class (OBC). and received the appointment.

what is the matter

Petitioner Lakshmi Narayan Mahato was appointed to the post of Postal Assistant in the Postal Department in the year 1983 and was thereafter promoted to the post of Inspector. According to the petitioner, he belongs to the Dhangarh caste, which is duly notified as a Scheduled Tribe. A caste certificate was issued in his favor on 6 February 1982. During the service period, he was asked to produce caste certificate duly attested by the department. In compliance with the above instructions, he obtained the caste certificate from Tehsildar Mahasamund on August 1, 1992. Meanwhile, some people complained about his caste. On this basis the department sought a report from the Collector. After a detailed investigation, a report was submitted on 11 March 1999 by the Office of the Collector (Primitive Caste Welfare), Raipur, verifying the caste of the petitioner, which falls in the ST category. Even the proceedings before the Superintendent of Police were dismissed after finding that the petitioner had not committed any offense in submitting the caste certificate. Meanwhile, the Chief Superintendent of the Postal Department had sent a report to the Collector’s office regarding the caste verification of the petitioner. The Additional Collector said that the caste certificate of the petitioner is genuine. The petitioner submitted that Dhankar/Dhangarh caste is duly notified under the category of ST in the State of Chhattisgarh and it also includes Dhangarh/Gadhariya, which has been duly considered by the Chhattisgarh State Scheduled Tribe Commission. It is recommended to include it within the term ‘Dhangarh’ as ​​notified by the Government.

High Court order

The case was heard in the single bench of Justice BD Guru. After the hearing, the court accepted the petition of the petitioner and canceled the decision of the High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee and directed the committee to verify the caste certificate of the petitioner as per the guidelines of the Supreme Court and the Act, 2013 and Rules, 2013. Please verify as per within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.