PADMA PATHAK Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, widow of Suresh Chandra Pathak, claims appointment on compassionate ground under the scheme for employment of the dependents of the employees dying-in-harness (hereinafter referred to as 'the scheme').

(2.) It transpires from the record that the petitioner's husband died on 6.4.1999 leaving behind four minor children and petitioner and on 20.4.1999, the petitioner moved an application for compassionate appointment on the ground that she had no source of livelihood to fall back upon. The claim of the petitioner was rejected by order dated 30.9.2000, Annexure-5 to the writ petition, which is impugned in the writ petition. The laconic ground spelt out in the order is that the application of the petitioner did not find favour with (he authorities.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the order does not contain any reason. It has not disclosed why and how petitioner was not found fit for appointment under the scheme. He further urged that she has no source of livelihood. He further submitted that mere payment of certain amount towards the Provident Fund, Gratuity, Benevolent Fund, Leave Encashment and ex-gratia, Life Insurance cannot be a ground for rejection of appointment on compassionate ground. It is further submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case where it is clear from the own report of the department that there was no earning member in the family that there was no source of income to fall back upon and the fact that there were four minor children dependent on the widow the petitioner was entitled to get employment.