ANIL MALHOTRA Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to grant compassionate appointment.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner's father, Chandrapal Malhotra was working as Assistant in the respondent/Bank had died in harness on 5.12.2012, therefore, the petitioner's mother had applied for compassionate appointment of the petitioner vide application dated 15.4.2013. The respondent had credited a sum of Rs. 4.5 lacs in the account without any notice and that by order dated 4.5.2013, the petitioner's mother was informed that the application for compassionate appointment cannot be considered because there is no scheme for compassionate appointment and was required to file application for lump sum ex-gratia payment. The stand of the petitioner is that subsequently, a scheme for compassionate appointment was introduced vide Annexure P-6 w.e.f. 5.8.2014.

(3.) The respondents have filed the reply taking the stand that the petitioner's application for compassionate appointment was duly considered and that in terms of the scheme dated 13.5.2011 only in exceptional circumstances, the compassionate appointment is permissible and the case of the petitioner does not fall within the scheme, therefore, the option for ex-gratia payment was given and the application supported by an affidavit was made by the petitioner and considering the same, the ex-gratia payment has been made. The further stand of the respondent is that the scheme Annexure P-6 is not applicable to the respondent/Bank.