ARVIND KUMAR SINGH Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this petition the petitioner is challenging the order dated 3.5.2006 by which the claim for compassionate appointment made by the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that after coming into force of the New Scheme dated 4.8.2005, in place of compassionate appointment a lump sum ex gratia compensation would be paid to the claimant. The facts of the case, in brief, are that late Vijay Pratap Singh was working as a Messenger (Class IV employee) in the State Bank of India, Branch Sahatwar, Ballia. He died while still in service on 18.5.2003 leaving behind his wife Yashoda Devi and two sons Arvind Kumar Singh (the petitioner) and Deepak and two daughters namely Deep Mala and Neetu.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, an application seeking compassionate appointment was submitted by the wife of the late Vijay Pratap Singh on 5.1.2004 for providing compassionate appointment to her son as he was dependent on the deceased employee. Another application was submitted on 13.2.2005. Thereupon the bank vide its letter dated 9.4.2005 called upon the widow of the deceased Vijay Pratap Singh to submit an application for appointment on compassionate ground. However, before the same could be considered, a New Scheme came into force on 4.8.2005 in the bank, which provided for a one time lump sum ex gratia compensation in lieu of compassionate appointment. On the coming into force of the New Scheme dated 4.8.2005, the application of the widow of late Vijay Pratap Singh has been rejected by the impugned order dated 3.5.2006, wherein it was pointed out that after coming into force of the New Scheme, application for compassionate appointment cannot be considered.

(3.) THE submission of Sri Anil Bhushan is that late Vijay Pratap Singh died while still in service on 18.5.2003 and first application seeking compassionate appointment was made by his widow on 5.1.2004 seeking appointment for her son -the petitioner. When no action was taken on this application another application was moved on 13.2.2005. The bank responded positively by calling upon the widow of the deceased employee to submit her application seeking compassionate appointment vide bank's letter dated 9.4.2005 filed as Annexure -3 to the writ petition. Therefore, in the circumstances, there was absolutely no justifiable reason for the bank not to have considered the application submitted by Yashoda Devi widow of the deceased employee.