Shanti Devi Sankhla vs Jaipur Thar Gramin Bank and Others

Govind Mathur, J.—As per circular dated 30.8.1982 issued by the Respondent Bank, the Petitioner No. 2 submitted an application seeking appointment on compassionate ground on 15.6.2006, being Ward of Shri Bhanu Pratap Sankhla, who died on 25.5.2006, while in service of the Respondent-Bank. The appointment to the Petitioner No. 2 was denied on the count that as per decision of the Board of Directors of Respondent-Bank taken on 11.8.2006, only an exgratia payment could have been given.

While challenging denial of appointment, it is submitted by learned Counsel for the Petitioner that Shri Bhanu Pratap Sankhla while in service of Respondent-Bank died on 25.5.2006 and an application was given on 15.6.2006 i.e. prior to 11.8.2006, therefore, the case of the Petitioner is required to be considered as per the circular dated 30.8.1982 pertaining to grant of appointment on compassionate grounds to the wards of deceased employee of the Bank. Reliance is placed by learned Counsel for the Petitioner upon a Single Bench judgment of this Court in Chakarwati Singh v. Marwar Ganganagar Bikaner Gramin Bank, reported in 2011(1) WLC (RAJ.) 742. In the case aforesaid, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court held as under:

The Petitioner, who applied within one month from the date of death of the employee has been denied appointment because the Board of Directors who were competent to take decision on the day when the Petitioner applied for the post did not taken the decision. There appears to be no reasonable reason for not taking decision in favour of the Petitioner by the Board of Directors. If it would have been taken in time, the Petitioner would have got the appointment as he was eligible for the appointment and as per the Respondents if the Board of Directors would have taken the decision in time, the Petitioner could have been given appointment even after 6.10.2006 as has been done in two cases of appointment. Coming into force of the scheme, which came into effect from 6.10.2006, admittedly cannot govern the case of the Petitioner because the cause of action to him accrued before 6.10.2006 and he applied when the Scheme of 1983 was in force.

While opposing claim of Petitioner it is submitted by learned Counsel for the Respondents that as per the decision of the Board of Directors of the Bank taken on 11.8.2006 all the pending applications were to be considered and decided as per the criteria adopted on 11.8.2006 that is of grant of exgratia payment instead of appointment on compassionate grounds.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

This Court in the case of Chakarwati Singh (supra) examined a similar controversy. In the case aforesaid too a ward of deceased employee of the Regional Rural Bank submitted an application for appointment on compassionate ground, but that was not accepted in view of a subsequent scheme adopted by the Board of Directors of the Bank. As per new scheme, the wards of a deceased Bank employee are not entitled for getting appointment on compassionate ground, but exgratia payment.

It was held in the case of Chakarwati Singh (supra) that if the competent authority of the Bank would have acted diligently, then the appointment as per then existing scheme would have been given.

In the instant case too, the Scheme floated under the circular dated 30.8.1982 was in currency up to 11.8.2006. Shri Bhanu Pratap Sankhla died on 25.5.2006 and an application claiming appointment on compassionate ground was submitted by the Petitioner No. 2 on 15.6.2006 i.e. during the currency of the Scheme floated under the circular dated 30.8.1982. The case of the Petitioner No. 2, therefore, should have been considered in accordance with the circular dated 30.8.1982 as held by this Court in the case of Chakarwati Singh (supra).

The petition for writ, thus, is allowed. The Respondents are directed to consider the case of the Petitioner No. 2 for appointment on compassionate grounds being a ward of late Shri Bhanu Pratap Sankhla in accordance with the circular dated 30.8.1982.

No order as to costs.