Mohinder Pal, J. - (1.) HUSBAND of Birbati Rani (petitioner), namely, Vinod Kumar was working as a Peon -cum -Frash in the State Bank of Patiala, SSI branch, Sector 24, Faridabad -respondent No. 3 (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent -Bank'). Unfortunately, Vinod Kumar died on October 17, 2004. After his death, Birbati Rani (petitioner), who has to support three minor children besides mother -in -law and two sister -in -law requested the respondent -Bank to give her suitable appointment. She has studied upto the 8th Standard. Application dated December 03, 2004 (Annexure P -3) was submitted by her in this regard to the respondent -Bank. However, her prayer for compassionate appointment was not accepted, which was conveyed to the petitioner vide letter dated September 14, 2005 (Annexure P -7). She thereafter submitted representation to the respondent -Bank. Her representation was forwarded by the Chief Manager of the respondent -Bank to the Assistant General Manager, State Bank of Patiala, Region -II, New Delhi, for favourable consideration vide letter dated November 14, 2005 (Annexure P -8). When the petitioner failed to get the desired relief, she filed the present writ petition.
(2.) UPON notice of motion, written statement on behalf of the respondents has been filed by the Chief Manager of the respondent -Bank. It has been pleaded that the dependent of an employee after his death cannot seek the appointment on compassionate grounds as a matter of right. It has been stated that the total compensatory benefits accrued to the petitioner after the death of her husband were Rs. 3,37,000/ - (i.e. Rs. 28,028/ - as provident fund Rs. 18,825/ - as gratuity, Rs. 1,00,000/ - out of welfare fund, Rs. 8,332.8) on account of leave encashment and Rs. 2,00,000/ - under Group State Bank of Patiala Staff minus Rs. 18,000/ - which were recoverable from the husband of the petitioner on account of loan advance to him. On this amount of Rs. 3,37,000/ - the petitioner is getting monthly interest of Rs. 1,825/ -. She is also getting family pension of Rs. 1,627/ - per month. The petitioner also mentioned in her application for compassionate appointment that she is earning Rs. 900/ - per month on account of sale of milk. She is, thus, having an monthly income of Rs. 4,352/ -. According to the respondents, considering the financial position of the petitioner, her case for compassionate appointment was declined. In the replication filed on behalf of the petitioner to the written statement of the respondents, it has been pleaded that the amount of Rs. 2,00,000/ - received by the petitioner under Group State Bank of India Life Insurance Scheme for State Bank of Patiala staff cannot be taken into consideration for determining the family income. Moreover, this amount of Rs. 2,00,000/ - was received by the petitioner on November 05, 2007, whereas her request for compassionate appointment was rejected on September 6, 2005; meaning thereby this amount could not be taken into consideration at that time, as alleged by the respondents in their written statement.
(3.) WE have heard Mr. R.S. Sihota, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. H.P.S. Ishar, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner and Mr. H.S. Mehtani, Advocate, appearing for the respondents and have gone through the records of the case.;