MUKESH THAKUR Vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been preferred by the Petitioner for a direction on the Respondent authorities to consider the case of the Petitioner for his compassionate appointment and it is also prayed for quashing the order refusing to appoint the Petitioner on the compassionate ground dated 23.5.2005 (Annexure-5) to the writ petition. The Petitioner's father was appointed in the Respondent-Bank in the year 1976 and thereafter, he died on 29.3.2000; and thereafter, an application for seeking compassionate appointment was filed by the mother of the Petitioner, namely, Lalita Thakur (Annexure-2 to the writ application). Thereafter, the case of the Petitioner was not considered by the Bank, she preferred the writ petition before this Court vide WPS No. 5803 of 2003, which was disposed of by this Court on 02.12.2003 with a direction to the Bank to take a final decision upon the application filed by the wife of the deceased-employee as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months from the date of the receipt of the order. In compliance of the said order, the Respondent-Bank rejected the application and offered ex-gratis amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- but the mother of the Petitioner did not accept the said amount. Thereafter, the son of the deceased-employee preferred this writ application.

(2.) This writ petition has been contested on the ground that the deceased employee died in harness and the scheme is revised by the Circular dated 1.11.2000 and the widow is entitled to claim compassionate appointment provided her monthly income does not exceed Rs. 5,000/-. The Scheme further provides that a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- as Ex-gratis amount can be offered to the claimant in case the employment could not be provided. The same offer was given to the mother of the Petitioner. It was further alleged that the Petitioner's mother preferred the claim for compassionate appointment of her son before the Bank but the Petitioner did not prefer any claim before the Bank.

(3.) I heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the records.