GEETA DEVI Vs. ALLAHABAD BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have challenged the order passed by the respondents which was communicated to them vide letters dated 9.5.2002 and 20.5.2002 whereby the competent authority has expressed its inability to appoint petitioner No. 2 on compassionate ground for the reasons stated in the said letters.

(2.) PETITIONERS ' case is that the deceased husband of petitioner No. 1 and father of petitioner No. 2 was serving in the respondent -Bank as Armed Guard. He worked from 1996 to 1998 and, thereafter died.in harness in 1998. The petitioners, thereafter, made an application for appointment of petitioner No. 2 on compassionate ground. The said application was rejected on the ground that the income shown by the bereaved family was sufficient to maintain the petitioners.

(3.) ADMITTED facts which emerge from the affidavits are that the deceased husband of petitioner No. 1 was the ex -service man and after his retirement he joined the Bank as Armed Guard. The deceased was getting pension and after his death the petitioners have been getting family pension from the Government. Petitioners have also" been paid retiral benefits and have been getting family pension for the respondent -Bank. It is well settled that the object of compassionate appointment is to give immediate relief to the family of the deceased. Mere death of the employee does not entitle the family to compassionate appointment.