Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 647 (GAU)

Shahanaz Alfida Wahib v. Union Bank of India

2015-05-28

K.SREEDHAR, P.K.SAIKIA

body2015
JUDGMENT : Heard the appellant and the respondents. 2) The appellant is the wife of the deceased who was an employee of the respondent bank and who died in harness. 3) Under the “revised scheme for payment of ex-gratia amount in lieu of appointment on compassionate grounds and appointment of dependants of deceased employees on compassionate grounds effective from 31st July 2004”, the appellant was offered an ex-gratia of Rs 8 lakh. 4) The deceased left behind, apart from the appellant, his parents and two brothers. A dispute arose between the appellant and her in-laws regarding sharing of the ex-gratia amount. A civil suit(TS 268/2011) is pending. 5) The bank contends that the deceased had borrowed Rs 6 lakh-odd, and tried to deduct the said amount from the ex-gratia amount offered to appellant. Appellant filed a writ petition[WP(C) 4989/2011] challenging the action(deduction of loans from the ex-gratia amount) on the part of the bank and seeking a direction to grant family pension to her. The writ petition was dismissed on the ground that the civil suit is pending. Hence this appeal. 6) Clauses 5 and 8 of the scheme which deal with ex-gratia payments read as follows. “5. Ex-gratia Payment. (a) In the cases as in para 4(A), ex-gratia amount will be paid to the family of the employee if eligible and if requested for within six months from the date of the death of the employee. The family shall be in indigent or penurious circumstances. “Family” for this purpose would mean and include spouse, wholly dependent children (son, including legally adopted son/unmarried daughter including legally adopted unmarried daughter). In case of unmarried employee, parents who are wholly dependent on the employee will constitute “family”. (b) Ex-gratia may be granted to the family of the employee in the manner and subject to the ceilings specified below, if the monthly income of the family from all sources is less than 100% of the last drawn salary(net of taxes) of the employee to enable the family to maintain a decent standard of living after the death of the sole bread winner. 8. The ex-gratia relief/compassionate appointment under the above Scheme is not an entitlement but may be granted at the sole discretion of the Bank looking into the financial conditions of the family and in deserving and eligible cases only”. 8. The ex-gratia relief/compassionate appointment under the above Scheme is not an entitlement but may be granted at the sole discretion of the Bank looking into the financial conditions of the family and in deserving and eligible cases only”. 7) It is the contention of the respondents that the father was named as a nominee and that the in-laws of the appellant are also entitled to the share of the exgratia amount. This contention of the respondents appears to be untenable given the clear terms and conditions of exgratia payment. 8) Clause 5 of the scheme clearly defines the word “family”. Parents, brothers and sisters of the deceased are not defined to be the “family members”; only the spouse and children are defined to be the “family members”. 9) The exgratia amount is not an estate that can be inherited by the sharers and residuaries according to the Muslim Law. The terms of the scheme enable only the wife and children as “members of the family” to receive ex-gratia amount. In that view of the matter the in-laws of the appellant would not be entitled to any share in the ex-gratia amount. 10) The provision of clause 8 of the scheme is a discretionary exgratia grant to the “family” as defined in clause 5 to meet the financial crisis and the penurious situation. The amount paid is not a terminal benefit. When the bank in pursuance of the terms of the scheme awards exgratia grant the said payment should not carry any stringent condition which is not envisaged in the scheme. It may be that the deceased employee borrowed loan and it may be due to the bank. The bank can recover such loan liability from the estate of the deceased and the same cannot be the subject matter of deduction from the discretionary exgratia grant. It is therefore directed that the bank shall pay the exgratia amount to the appellant with interest at the rate of nine per cent per annum from the date of the entitlement till payment. The appellant is also entitled to family pension which the bank should pay without any further dispute in the matter. Accordingly the writ appeal is allowed.