TABASSUM FAROOQ Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Gopal Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent -Bank and perused the records.

(2.) This writ petition was filed in the year 1994, challenging the order dated 4.12.1993 as contained in Annexure -1 to the writ petition, whereby the claim of petitioner for compassionate appointment has been declined on the ground that the Scheme for compassionate appointment was not in vogue at the time of death of Late Farooq Ahmad Khan, father of the petitioner.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order impugned is patently wrong and illegal. Under the similar facts and circumstances one Pummi Soori whose father has also died in the year 1977 has been given compassionate appointment in the year 1990, whereas the claim of petitioner has been denied in the year 1993 in most arbitrary and illegal manner. It is submitted that the petitioner is still unmarried and there is no bread -earner in the family. She is still pursuing her case for compassionate appointment as the conditions prevailing at the time of death of her father are still existing.