Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 331 (MP)

Union Bank of India v. Devanand Arkhel

2024-04-05

DEVNARAYAN MISHRA, RAVI MALIMATH

body2024
ORDER 1. Aggrieved by order dated 29.11.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in allowing the Writ Petition No. 17111 of 2022 and directing the respondents Bank to appoint the writ petitioner on compassionate ground, the respondents therein are in appeal. 2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner is one of the sons of the deceased who passed away while in service on 8.8.2018. The other L.Rs. are his mother and two brothers and two sisters. Two of the brother are already working in the Police Department as Constable. Therefore, the plea of the writ petitioner was rejected. Questioning the same, the instant writ petition was filed. 3. The learned Single Judge even though noticing the relevant provisions of the policy, came to the view that the earning brothers of the deceased may separate from the joint family in future. That they may have their own family structure with the passage of time. Hence, the compassionate appointment cannot be denied. Therefore, the Bank was directed to appoint the writ petitioner. 4. We are unable to accept the reasoning of the learned Single Judge. The policy of the Bank which has been culled out by the learned Single Judge with reference to eligibility so far as Clause 10 is concerned it was noticed that even in deserving cases even assuming that there is already an earning member in the family a dependent family member will be considered for compassionate appointment with the prior approval of the competent authority of the Bank. Therefore, only because that there is an earning member the same cannot be denied on that ground alone. The Bank will have to complete the exercise as postulated in Clause 10 of the policy. They have to ascertain whether there is any indigency and various other factors as contained in Clause 10 and other Clauses of the policy. 5. Apparently, the same has not been considered by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge went on an assumption that the brothers may separate and they may have their own family. This cannot be accepted. The assumption of the learned Single Judge cannot form a part of the reasoning while allowing the writ petition. 6. Hence, for all these reasons, the appeal is allowed. The order dated 29.11.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 17111 of 2022 is set aside. This cannot be accepted. The assumption of the learned Single Judge cannot form a part of the reasoning while allowing the writ petition. 6. Hence, for all these reasons, the appeal is allowed. The order dated 29.11.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 17111 of 2022 is set aside. However, the respondent - Bank is directed to reconsider the case of the writ petitioner keeping in mind the relevant provisions of the policy specifically the fact that even though there is earning member, the Bank will still consider the case of the L.Rs. subject to satisfying the various clauses. 7. Pending interlocutory application is disposed off.