ATUL KUMAR Vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Ram Sajiwan Prajapati, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Vivek Ratan Agrawal learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 to 4 and perused the material available on record.

(2.) The petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment has been rejected by order dtd. 19/4/2025. The reason assigned in the order is that the last drawn monthly salary of the petitioner's late father was 56,793/- whereas the net monthly notional income of the family from all sources, as declared by the family members, works out to 52,894/-. It is further mentioned in the order that petitioner's mother, i.e., widow of the deceased employee, is drawing family pension of 39,272/- as per pension slip of February, 2025 and that the family has received net terminal benefit of 27.33 lacs (inclusive of Death Relief Fund of 4,50,000/-). The Authority concerned has, therefore, found that family of the deceased employee cannot be considered as living in penury or financial destitution justifying immediate financial relief.

(3.) Challenging the order impugned, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the application was filed by the petitioner within prescribed time after his father had died-in-harness coupled with the fact that the deceased has left behind 8 children, i.e., 6 sons and 2 daughters, the Authority should have given thoughtful consideration to the said aspects.