Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1614 (ALL)

Sanjay Kumar v. State of U. P.

2016-04-28

ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA

body2016
JUDGMENT Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Petitioner's claim for grant of compassionate appointment has been considered, pursuant to the directions issued by this Court and rejected vide order under challenge. The order records that according to the scheme framed for grant of compassionate appointment, such appointment is to be granted in following exceptional circumstances: - "To a dependant family member of permanent employee of the Bank who (i)dies while performing official duty, as a result of violence, terrorism, robbery, or dacoity; or (ii) dies within 5 years of first appointment or before reaching the age of 30 years, whichever is later, leaving a dependant spouse and/ or minor children." 2. The order also refers to a circular issued by the Ministry of Finance dated 5.12.2014. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order is illegal and arbitrary inasmuch as there is an agreement entered into between the staff association and the respondent on 25.8.2014, according to which petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment is covered. The submission is opposed by Sri S.K. Kakkar, who has produced the modified scheme of the bank, which has become effective from 5.8.2014. Clause-II of the scheme, which refers to two conditions, noticed above, has also been produced. 3. Learned counsel has also relied upon Clause-5 of the policy, which reads as under: - "5. Coverage: - 5.1. To a dependent family member of permanent employee of the Bank who (i) dies while performing official duty, as a result of violence, terrorism, robbery or dacoity; or (ii) dies within five years of first appointment or before reaching the age of 30 years, whichever is latter, leaving a dependent spouse and / or minor children. 5.2 For the purpose of the Scheme' employee' would mean and include only a confirmed regular permanent employee who was serving full time or part-time on scale wages, at the time of death under the exceptional circumstances and does not include any one engaged on contract/temporary/ casual or any person who is paid on commission basis". 4. Rival submissions arise for consideration before this Court. 5. Law is settled that compassionate appointment cannot be claimed as a matter of right and can be considered only in accordance with the scheme framed for the purpose. In the facts of the present case, scheme permits appointment on compassionate ground in exceptional circumstances which have been specified in the scheme itself. 5. Law is settled that compassionate appointment cannot be claimed as a matter of right and can be considered only in accordance with the scheme framed for the purpose. In the facts of the present case, scheme permits appointment on compassionate ground in exceptional circumstances which have been specified in the scheme itself. It is not in dispute that the petitioner does not fall in either of the two conditions. In such circumstances, the refusal by bank to offer compassionate appointment cannot be said to be illegal or arbitrary. 6. From the records, it further transpires that the petitioner has already moved an application for payment of ex-gratia amount in terms of the scheme, to which the petitioner is entitled. It is, therefore, provided that the benefit of the ex-gratia, in accordance with the scheme, shall be computed within a period of 2 months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order and the benefit thereunder shall be released immediately thereafter. With the aforesaid observation, writ petition stands disposed of.