J. PERIYASAMY Vs. CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner's father was employed as a Messenger in the respondent Bank. He expired on 12.12.2001 while he was in service. The petitioner made an application on 03.04.2003 for compassionate appointment due to the death of his father on the ground that his father was the sole bread -winner of the family and that he was employed in a lower cadre in the Bank. The request of the petitioner for compassionate appointment was rejected by the 2nd respondent by order dated 24.09.2004 stating that the service record of the father of the writ petitioner was a blemished one on account of disciplinary action taken against him, while he was in service. The said order is extracted hereunder:

(2.) WHILE the petitioner was pursuing under the Right to Information Act, he made another representation dated 12.10.2010 to the respondent Bank to give him compassionate appointment. According to the petitioner, he also made various other representations before making this representation on 12.10.2010. However, the acknowledgements are not produced for these representations. He has stated in the representation dated 12.10.2010 about the earlier rejection order dated 24.09.2004 and also his efforts to get details of the alleged blemished record mentioned in the order dated 24.09.2004 about his father's service. Since there was no response for the said representation, the petitioner filed W.P. No. 27806 of 2010 seeking to dispose of the said representation. This Court, by order dated 11.11.2011, disposed of W.P. No. 27806 of 2010, directing the respondent Bank to pass orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 12.10.2010. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 11.11.2011 in the above said writ petition, the impugned order dated 09.01.2012 was passed rejecting the request of the petitioner for compassionate appointment giving two reasons, namely, (i) that the service record of the petitioner's father was a blemished one and (ii) that the scheme of compassionate appointment was discontinued from 04.08.2005 onwards and that the present scheme, only provides, in appropriate cases, for payment of ex -gratia lumpsum amount, in lieu of providing compassionate appointment. Hence, the present writ petition.

(3.) HEARD both sides.