PRAMOD KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RADHE Shyam Sharma was an employee of Respondent -Bank. He was posted on the post of Teller. The petitioner No. 1 is his son and petitioner No. 2 is his wife. He died in harness on 17 -11 -1993. In the month of January, 1994, petitioner No. 2 filed an application for appointment of her son on compassionate ground. The petition for appointment on compassionate ground was rejected on 4 -3 -95(Annexure 1). The petitioner No. 2 filed a representation thereafter. On the said representation, an inquiry was made with regard to financial position of the deceased employee by the Deputy General Manager, who submitted a report (Annexure 2). The representation of the petitioner No. 2 was rejected on 11 -6 -97 (Annexure 3). In the year 1998 she again filed a representation to the Finance Minister which was remitted to the bank for disposal. The said representation was rejected on 30 -3 -99 (Annexure 4). The petitioners thereafter filed the writ petition on 19 -4 -2001 for issue of a direction to the respondent for appointment of the petitioner No. 1 on compassionate ground. In para 6 of the writ petition, a statement has been made that her sons, namely, Ashok Kumar Sharma and Binod Kumar Sharma are living separately from her, they have no concern with her. She is living with petitioner No. 1. In the petition, averment has also been made that the financial position of the petitioners is not satisfactory.

(2.) IN the counter -affidavit, the claim of the petitioners has been denied and it has been stated, while the husband of petitioner No. 2 was in service, his total emolument was Rs. 8,123 -14, out of which after deduction he was getting Rs. 2,932 -14. After the death of the employee, the family pension to the tune of Rs. 4,161.00 was sanctioned and petitioner No. 2 was getting the same. Further a statement has been made in the counter -affidavit that two sons of the deceased, namely, Binod Kumar Sharma and Ashok Kumar Sharma were already in employment. The financial position of the deceased employee has to be considered for appointment on compassionate ground. However, no specific averment has been made with respect to the claim of the petitioner No. 2 that two sons are separate from her. However, learned Counsel for the Bank produced the original records and drew my attention to original application filed by petitioner No. 2 for appointment on compassionate ground. Wherefrom it appears that no statement was made in the petition that both Ashok Kumar Sharma and Binod Kumar Sharma were separate from the petitioners. Moreover, no document has been annexed with the writ petition to show that sons were separate. Merely saying or making averment in the writ petition that they were separate is not sufficient. Document to the aforesaid effect is necessary. Thus, apparently it appears that after rejection of the claim of the petitioners the plea of separation has been taken. The appointment on compassionate ground is not a mode of appointment under the statute. However, claim for appointment on compassionate ground is to be considered only with a view to provide immediate financial relief to the deceased family as after the death of the employee the income of the family becomes zero. In such a situation the scheme was framed to achieve the object to provide immediate financial relief no the family.

(3.) IN the instant case, death has caused in the year 1993. The claim of the petitioners was rejected in the year 1995. The representation of the petitioners was rejected in the years 1997 and 1999. The writ petition has been filed after about two years of the rejection of the representation.