High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Diwakar Gupta v. Chairman/Managing Director Central Bank Of India And Others - WRIT - A No. 52625 of 2004  RD-AH 7193 (4 April 2006)
Court No. 10
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 52625 of 2004
Diwakar Gupta ------ Petitioner
Central Bank of India & others. ....... Respondents.
Hon'ble V.C.Misra, J.
List has been revised. Learned counsel for the petitioner is present. Learned counsel for the respondents Bank is not present and he has sent his illness slip. On the repeated insistence of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this case is taken up for consideration. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged in this matter. This writ petition is being finally disposed off at the admission stage in terms of the Rules of Court, 1952.
This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 20.9.2004 (Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition) passed by respondent no. 4 rejecting the claim of the petitioner and further for a direction to the respondents to make the appointment of the petitioner under the Dying in Harness Rules, on compassionate ground on the post of his deceased father, as a clerk with the respondents-Bank.
The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner's father namely Udai Shankar Gupta met with an accident on 4.2.2004 and succumbed to death during the course of his employment in the respondent Bank. The petitioner being a senior male member moved an application on 9.2.2004 in prescribed proforma with no objection of his mother for appointment on compassionate ground under dying in harness Rules. The grievance of the petitioner is that his application was rejected by the respondents Bank vide its order dated 20.9.2004 (Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition) on the ground that the financial condition of the petitioner's family was not that of indigent in nature, therefore, as per Government/ IBA guidelines, the petitioner cannot be provided an employment under dying in harness Rules. In para 8 of the writ petitioner the petitioner has categorically stated that there is no source of income and the family economical condition has run down and is not in position to extend his education.
It has been stated in para 7 of the counter affidavit that the scheme of appointment is to enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis which it faces at the time of the death of the deceased employee and the object of appointment is not to give an opportunity of employment let alone on a post, which was held by the deceased employee. In para 8 of the counter affidavit it has been stated that admittedly the mother of the petitioner i.e. wife of the deceased employee has already been getting Rs. 5000/- as family pension. The matter was placed before the higher authority with the relevant details and after consideration of full facts of the case it was found that the financial condition of the family of the petitioner was not such that it warranted the grant of compassionate appointment. It also took into consideration the Government of India/IBA Guidelines governing the grant of such employment (Annexures No. C.A.-1 & C.A.-2 to the counter affidavit). In the Scheme for appointment of dependents of deceased employees and dependants of employees retired on medical grounds issued by Indian Bank's Association vide letter dated August 23,1996, Clause-V provides as under:
"V. Financial condition of the family:
The Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that dependants of an employee dying in harness can be considered for compassionate appointment provided the family is without any means of livelihood. Therefore, the rules may provide for taking into account the following to determine the financial condition of the family: -
(a) Family Pension
(b) Gratuity amount received
(C) Employee's/ Employers contribution to Provident
(d) Any compensation paid by the bank or its welfare fund.
Public Sector bank may amend the present policy of compassionate appointment of dependants of deceased employees and dependants of retired employees on medical grounds, keeping in view the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court."
In the counter affidavit it has been further stated that Clause 5 of the aforesaid Scheme relates to the financial condition of the family wherein it has been observed that while giving compassionate appointment to the dependent of the deceased employee, the Bank should take into account the financial conditions of the family, namely, the pension- gratuity amount- Employer's contribution towards Provident Fund- income of family from other sources- proceeds of LIC Policy etc., etc.. It has also been contended in the counter affidavit that while considering the petitioner's representation it was found that the petitioner's family was not financially unsound nor could it be said that it was facing an immediate financial crisis nor was in dire need of money, as the mother of the petitioner had received the amount, viz. Gratuity-Rs. 1,36,022/-, LIC claim through Canara Bank Rs. 52,000/-, leave encashment Rs. 71,514/-, Provident Fund Rs. 1,54,530/- (vide Annexure C.A.-3 to the counter affidavit).
I have looked into the record of the present case and after hearing learned counsel for the petitioner at length I find that the petitioner has failed on the facts of the present case to prove distress, which could warrant compassionate appointment to mitigate hardship immediately to the family of the deceased employee, in question. It is settled law that purpose and object of providing appointment on compassionate ground is to mitigate the hardship due to death of the bread earner in the family and to provide immediate succor to a family of deceased employee in distress. The object underlying a provision for grant of compassionate employment is to enable the family of the deceased employee to tide over the sudden crisis having arisen due to death of the bread-earner and without any means of livelihood so that the family would be able to make both ends meet. In my view when other persons who are eligible for appointment and who may be more meritorious than the dependants of deceased employee, they would be deprived of their right of being considered for such appointment in accordance with law and rules and their rights to seek employment on those posts by direct recruitment would be completely excluded. In the present case, apart from the other amounts received, as stated above, the mother of the petitioner (widow of the deceased employee) has been getting a sum of Rs. 5000/- per month, as pension. In such circumstances, the writ petition lacks merit and no case is made out for interference of this Court exercising extra ordinary discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is made clear that this order will not come in the way of consideration of appointment of the widow of the deceased (mother of the petitioner), whose husband died in harness as mentioned in the impugned order dated 20.9.2004 (Annexure No. 3 to the writ petition).
With the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Kdo / 52625/04
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.