SIDDHARTH ARYA Vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition has been restored to its original number. I have heard Counsel for petitioner and Sri V.R. Agarwal for respondents.

(2.) PETITIONER is seeking compassionate appointment in Bank oh the death of his father late Sri Himmat Ram Arya, who died in harness on 27.9.1998. From the pleadings I find that petitioner's mother had received Rs. 1,48,097/ - as retrial dues. A loan of Rs. 1,37,426/ - was taken for construction of house. It is contended that the land was purchased but the house could not be constructed. Three daughters of the deceased employee have since married and that now the family has three member including petitioner, his mother and an unmarried sister. Alongwith counter -affidavit the respondents have annexed a letter received by the Records Officer, Mahar Regiment Abhilekh Karyalaya Records, Mahar Regiment Saugor (MP) dated 10.7.2002 sent to Union Bank of India, Adarsh Mandi Sthal Branch Pilibhit Road, Bareiliy, by which the Army authority have informed the bank that petitioner's mother is also entitled to family pension from the Army. Her husband had rendered service in the Army. A family pension claim form was sent to the petitioner's mother on 17.5.1999 but she did not pursue the matter. This document shows that petitioner's mother has an addition and subsisting right to receive family pension from the Army.

(3.) THERE is series of decisions of Apex Court which gives ample guidelines in these matter. An extract from the decision given in Om Praksh Ram and Anr. v. Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad and Ors. is quoted as below: In Sushma Cosain v. Union of India and Ors. : 1989 (59) FLR 626 (SC), the Apex Court held as under: