CANARA BANK, (A NATIONALISED BANK UNDER GOVERNMENT OF INDIA) REPT. BY SENIOR MANAGER, STAFF SECTION (WORKMEN) BANGALORE CIRCLE OFFICE, NO. 86, SPENCERS TOWER, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001 Vs. SMT. USHA P. MURARI (ALSO CALLED AS SMT. U.P. MURAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the respondent - Bank in W.P. No. 34505/2003 being aggrieved by the order dated 29.09.2005, wherein the learned single Judge of this Court has set aside the endersement issued by the respondent -Bank (appellant herein) dated 17.07.2002 as per Annexure ' B' to the writ petition rejecting the application of the writ petitioner (respondent herein) for appointment on compassionate ground and has directed the respondent to consider the case of the writ petitioner for compassionate appointment in accordance with law in terms of the order within eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the said order.

(2.) THE material facts leading up to this appeal are as follows: -

(3.) THE learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant - Bank submitted that the scheme framed by the appellant - Bank for compassionate appointment is only to overcome the financial contingency, which may occur due to the death or the employee while in service to the members of his family and in the present case, there was an enquiry for misconduct against the husband of the respondent herein and the scheme was not applicable to the respondent. The learned senior counsel further submitted that when financial contingency has been overcome in view of the terminal benefits granted to the respondent and also the pension, which she is receiving per month, the direction issued by the learned single Judge for considering the application of the respondent herein for compassionate appointment is illegal and liable to be set aside. The learned senior counsel further submitted that the application of the respondent has been rightly rejected by the appellant - Bank as per the endorsement dated 17.07.2002. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s. Eastern Coalfields Ltd., Vs. Anil Badyakar and Others AIR 2009 SCW 4427, wherein it is held that -appointment on compassionate ground is not a vested right and cannot be claimed long after death of employee in harness and when there was a dispute between the heirs of deceased employee, the claim for appointment made and granted 12 years after the death of employee was contrary to the object of such appointment and appointment was liable to be cancelled. The learned senior counsel has also relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in General Manager (D and PB) and Others Vs. Kunti Tiwary and Another, (2004) 3 LLJ 1136 SC , wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that in view of the scheme framed by the Bank, compassionate appointment can be provided only in cases, where the deceased employee left his family in penury and without any means of livelihood and since terminal benefits received and other movable and immovable property possessed, by the family of the deceased employee showed that its financial condition was not penurious, the employer -Bank was justified in rejecting the application for compassionate appointment.