Sandeep Mehta, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) BY way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction for compassionate appointment in the respondent State Bank of India in place of his father late Narayan Ram, who was employed at Raika Bagh branch of the respondent Bank and expired during service on 7.11.2000. Facts in brief are that upon the death of his father on 7.11.2000 while in service of the Bank, the petitioner submitted an application Annex. 1 with a prayer for being appointed in place of his father on compassionate grounds. The said application preferred by the petitioner was dismissed and a communication Annex. 2 dated 4.10.2001 was forwarded to the petitioner on the ground that the income from terminal benefits and investments which the family was receiving post the death of the employee was considered adequate for meeting the hardship and crisis in the near future. Thus, it was conveyed to the petitioner that he was ineligible to be appointed on compassionate ground. The petitioner claims that he continued to file numerous representations for redressal of his grievance but despite the assurance given by the respondent authorities time and again, his representations remained unheeded. On this, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the instant writ petition.
(3.) THE respondents have filed a reply to the writ petition. A specific plea has been taken in the reply that the writ petition was highly belated and had been preferred after a delay of 8 years. The order rejecting the candidature of the petitioner was communicated to him way back in the year 2001 and he has approached the Court after undue delay and thus, he is not entitled to the reliefs claimed. It is further claimed in the reply that the compassionate appointment is not a matter of right and the object thereof is to enable the family of the deceased employee if in penury to tide over the sudden financial crisis caused due to death of the sole bread earner and not to provide employment. Appointment on compassionate ground is an exception to the general rule of appointment. It is further averred in the reply that by the mere fact that the writ petition has been preferred after 9 years from the death of the employee, it can be assumed that the family was able to tide over the crisis arising from the date of the deceased employee Narayan Ram. The order Annex. 1 has been justified by stating that the entire record and the facts of the case were examined and thereafter, the order Annex. 1 was passed with the conclusion that the family of the deceased employee was not in the state of penury but rather was having sufficient sources of income. The order Annex. 1 was preceded with an enquiry wherein it was concluded that the sources of income of the family were sufficient to tide over and avert the financial crisis.;