CANARA BANK Vs. BODA DEEPTHI NAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Alluri Krishnam Raju, learned counsel for the appellants.

(2.) The appellants/Bank is in appeal against the impugned judgment, whereby the learned writ court held that the petitioner be entitled for consideration as per Circular dtd. 8/4/2015, i.e., the scheme for appointment on compassionate grounds to the dependants of the employee dying in harness and retiring on medical grounds due to incapacitation before reaching the age of 55 years or payment of ex-gratia lumpsum amount in lieu of compassionate appointment.

(3.) In order to appreciate the issue at hand, relevant facts are being narrated hereinafter. The petitioner's father while working as Senior Manager, M.J.Road, Currency Chest, Hyderabad, in the appellant Bank died on 15/4/2017. He is survived by the petitioner/daughter, wife and son and 92 year old mother. Family pension was sanctioned on 3/7/2017. Application for compassionate appointment was submitted on 12/7/2017 by the petitioner. While the application remain pending, the scheme of compassionate appointment dtd. 8/4/2015 was replaced by the new scheme vide circular dtd. 31/1/2018, which was made effective from 5/8/2014. It prescribed a ceiling of total income of the family Rs.35,000.00 per month to decide the eligibility criteria for compassionate appointment. The rejection order, dtd. 23/3/2018 computed the total monthly income of the family as Rs.43,333.00 which was more than the ceiling of Rs.35,000.00 per month. The writ petitioner assailed the rejection order before the learned writ court and also sought a writ of mandamus declaring her entitlement for being appointed on compassionate grounds in clerical cadre consequent to the demise of her father in harness on 15/4/2017.