CHAIRMAN, ODISHA GRAMYA BANK Vs. ABDUL AHAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The intra Court appeal has been filed assailing the judgment dated 03.04.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(c) No.9871 of 2004 directing the present appellant, who was the opposite party in the aforesaid writ application to provide the petitioner's family with a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/-(rupees one lakh fifty thousand) as interim compensation and to make the petitioner entitled to a suitable post commensurating to his education in its any Branch in the Cuttack district, within a period of two months from the date of the order when the petitioner files an affidavit of his unemployment in the meantime.

(2.) The writ petition was filed by the present respondent with the submissions that while his father Abdul Rojak working as a Driver in Cuttack Gramya Bank died in harness at the age of 49 years on 26.04.2001, leaving behind the widow mother of the petitioner, one married daughter, three unmarried daughters including two minors besides the petitioner. The family of the petitioner having no other source of livelihood, the petitioner, who was 21 years old at the relevant point of time, made an application to the Chairman of Cuttack Gramya Bank for an appointment on compassionate ground under the provisions of the scheme floated on 29.09.2001 by the Cuttack Gramya Bank, which provided for employment for the dependents of the deceased employee on compassionate ground in case of death after 1st May of 1996. The matter was enquired into as per procedure and it was found that the petitioner's family was in dire financial distress. On 05.01.2002, the Chairman of the Bank intimated the petitioner that since there was no vacancy available in their Bank, the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment could not be considered. The mother of the petitioner made another representation on 16.08.2002 and the petitioner also submitted subsequent representations on 29.11.2003 and 22.06.2004 bringing to the notice of the authority that he had passed +3 Arts in the meantime and was willing to accept any post in the Bank. Every time the bank authority was answering him with the same reply that there was no vacancy. Ultimately, the petitioner filed the writ application seeking a direction from the Court to the Bank Authority for providing him with an appointment as a Junior Clerk, or Messenger or any other post in the Bank on compassionate ground. It was contended on behalf of the opposite party-appellant, in the writ application that providing employment on compassionate ground is not a matter of right and the petitioner could not be accommodated due to non-availability of vacancy at the relevant point of time. It was further contended that the scheme of compassionate appointment was subject to availability of vacancy in the Bank and as per instructions of the sponsored Bank of Cuttack Gramya Bank, namely, UCO Bank, the compassionate appointment was to be considered subject to availability of vacancy and since there was no vacancy at the relevant point of time, the claim of the petitioner in the writ application could not be considered.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party-appellant relying upon a number of decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court submitted that the compassionate appointment is always subject to availability of vacancy and hence, no illegality was committed in rejecting the application of the petitioner, so as to call for any interference by the Writ Court. Thus, it was submitted that the impugned judgment passed by the learned Single Judge is not sustainable in law and is liable to be set aside.