Saumitra Dayal Singh, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the orders dated 23.03.2018 and 12.10.2018 passed by the respondent no.3-Zonal Manager, UCO Bank, by which the petitioner's application for grant of compassionate appointment had been rejected. In the order dated 26.03.2018, it has been noted, the Committee constituted for grant of compassionate appointment had observed-the claimant family had survived for sufficient time after the occurrence of the death of the employee/petitioner's father, Sri Shyam Sunder Shukla, on 12.10.2015. Therefore, it was assumed the family had dependable means of sustenance. By the subsequent order dated 12.10.2018, it had been further observed-the petitioner's mother was being paid family pension of Rs.17,731/- per month and his brother was gainfully employed, getting a salary of Rs.12,000/- per month. Therefore, it had been inferred, the family of the petitioner was neither indigent nor under financial distress as may call for grant of compassionate appointment.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits, initially upon the death of his father, the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment had been favourably considered by the bank. The then Zonal Head of the bank had issued a letter dated 06.08.2016 assuring the petitioner to create a lien for the next five years-to grant compassionate appointment, on a clerical post. During that time period the petitioner was expected to acquire a graduation degree, being the minimum qualification required for a clerical post. Therefore, it has been submitted, the impugned orders passed by the Zonal Manager rejecting the claim of the Manager are wholly contrary to the lien created and promise held out by the bank.;