Chief General Manager, State Bank of India and two Others vs Smt. Kavita Pandey

B.S. Verma and Servesh Kumar Gupta, JJ.—Heard Mr. D.S. Patni, Advocate for the appellants and Mr. Bhagwat Mehra, Advocate for the respondent. This Special Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 16-09-2013 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court, in Writ Petition No. 368(S/S) of 2013, Smt. Kavita Pandey Vs. The Chief General Manager and others, whereby the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and issued a mandamus directing the respondents/appellants to give compassionate appointment to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of the impugned order dated 16-09-2013.

The relief sought in the present appeal is that the judgment and order passed by learned Single Judge be set aside and the writ petition filed by the respondent be dismissed on the ground that the learned Single Judge failed to appreciate that the death of the husband of petitioner/respondent was under mysterious circumstances. Sri Pandey husband of the petitioner/respondent had not died while performing his official duty, as a result of violence, terrorism, robbery or dacoity. The sudden disappearance of husband of petitioner/respondent from the Branch and his subsequent death had no connection with the course of performance of official duty.

It is also contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appointment on compassionate ground is an exception to the general rule and same can be granted strictly as per the provision of the Scheme, as such same cannot be granted dehors the provisions of the Scheme.

It is further contended by learned counsel for the appellants that the old Scheme has been repelled and new Scheme for payment of ex-gratia lump sum amount, in lieu of appointment on compassionate grounds, has been introduced and the petitioner did not apply for grant of ex-gratia payment, which itself indicates that till new Scheme came into force, the petitioner and her family were not in financial crisis.

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent drew attention to the new Scheme. As per new Scheme, if the case is covered under the exceptional cases, compassionate appointment is given in two situations-

I. Employee dying while performing his official duty, as a result of violence, terrorism, robbery or dacoity.

II. Employee dying within five years of his first appointment or before reaching the age of 30 days, whichever is later, leaving a dependent spouse and/or minor children.

Learned counsel for the respondent has contended that the husband of the respondent had died on 23-4-2010. On that day he has first joined his duty in the office, later on left the office when only his dead body was discovered in the evening on the same day and the death of petitioner�s husband was due to an aggravated form of violence inflicted on him.

The learned Single Judge, in para-5 of the judgment has dealt the case of the petitioner in detail and has observed that it is a case where an extreme form of violence was inflicted on the deceased, which resulted in his death, therefore, the fact that the death of the petitioner�s husband was due to violence is never in doubt. The death had occurred in official duty hours as it was only after joining his duty the husband of petitioner left and ultimately met his violent death. Under these peculiar circumstances, a very heavy presumption was drawn by learned Single Judge in favour of the petitioner that her husband died while performing the official duties and the petitioner, therefore, must be given appointment on compassionate grounds.

Since the husband of the petitioner/respondent had died because of violence inflicted upon him, as has been observed by the learned Single Judge, we find no infirmity or illegality in the impugned judgment. The special appeal lacks merit and is dismissed.