SMT RASHMI PANDEY vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — WPS/4128/2022
Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 16th April 2026.
CNR: CGHC010192512022
Filing Number
WPS/10526/2022
Filing Date
13-Jun-2022
Registration No
WPS/4128/2022
Registration Date
17-Jun-2022
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
SERVICE MATTERS ( 6 )
Sub-Category
COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT. ( 613 )
Judicial Branch
Writ Section
Decision Date
16-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 26-May-2026
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SMT RASHMI PANDEY
Adv. ABDUL WAHAB KHAN,BARUN KUMAR CHAKRABARTY,BARUN KUMAR CHAKRABARTY, ,KUNAL SHARMA,A. SANDHYA RAO,BARUN KUMAR CHAKRABARTY
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.
-
2.Mukhya Vansanrakshak
-
3.Vanmandaladhikari
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
16-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan PandeyView PDF
Case Summary: WPS/4128/2022 - SMT RASHMI PANDEY v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Decision: The court dismissed the petitioner's writ petition seeking compassionate appointment as a Forest Guard following her father's death in 2016. The court held that under Clause 6A of the 2016 compassionate appointment policy, since the petitioner's mother is already in government service, the petitioner is ineligible for compassionate appointment, regardless of separate residence or lack of financial support. The court rejected the plea for an inquiry into financial dependency, ruling such inquiries are barred by the policy's express terms. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
17-Feb-2023
Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem SahuView PDF
-
22-Jun-2022
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh SamantView PDF
-
22-Jun-2022
Fresh Matters
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant
-
13-Jun-2022
Case filed
Registration No. WPS/4128/2022
Case Summary: WPS/4128/2022 - SMT RASHMI PANDEY v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Decision: The court dismissed the petitioner's writ petition seeking compassionate appointment as a Forest Guard following her father's death in 2016. The court held that under Clause 6A of the 2016 compassionate appointment policy, since the petitioner's mother is already in government service, the petitioner is ineligible for compassionate appointment, regardless of separate residence or lack of financial support. The court rejected the plea for an inquiry into financial dependency, ruling such inquiries are barred by the policy's express terms. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts