Dismissed

Lalit Kumar v. Union Of India and 2 Others

Allahabad HC29 May 2023WRIA/7994/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought compassionate appointment as a dependent of a deceased State Bank employee who died in 2018. The bank denied the request under a 2023 order based on policy provisions regarding ex-gratia payment and the death occurring before the 2021 policy came into force.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's claim for appointment on compassionate grounds was denied.

Lalit Kumar Vs Union Of India and 2 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:119767

¶2

Court No. - 38

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7994 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Lalit Kumar Respondent :- Union Of India And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Lalta Prasad,Akhilendra Singh,Prabhat Kumar Singh

¶5

Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Satish Chaturvedi

¶6

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶7

Heard Shri Prabhat Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Pankaj Srivastava appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶8

The case of the petitioner is that being the dependent of the deceased employee of the State Bank who has already expired way back in the year 2018 itself and thereafter petitioner being the son applied for appointment on compassionate grounds. The request as made for seeking compassionate appointment was kept pending with the competent authority of the responding Bank and the same was decided vide order dated 28.3.2023 by way of giving reasoning that as per the applicable policy of the Bank itself the dependent of the deceased employee were not entitled for compassionate appointment if the ex-gratia amount has already been extended in favour of the dependants of the deceased employee of the Bank.

¶9

It has further been clarified by the learned counsel for the respondent that there was no policy available before the Bank for compassionate appointment there was only provision for payment of ex-gratia. It is further clarified by Shri Pankaj Srivastava, learned counsel for the Bank that there was the policy applicable in the year 2018, if any Bank employee expired within the five years from the date of initial appointment or before reaching the age of 40 years in that case only the compassionate appointment can be extended to the dependents of the deceased employee. The case of the petitioner is not covered under the scheme dated 27.12.2014.

¶10

Per contra Shri Prabhat Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently opposed the factual narration as raised by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the responding bank, while substantiating his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner sought the attention over the impugned order which has been passed on 28.3.2023 and as such the old policy/scheme was not applicable over the petitioner since at the time of taking the decision which culminated into the impugned order dated 28.3.2023 the new policy came into force on 17.3.2021 through which there is a provision for extending the compassionate appointment in favour of the dependents of the deceased employee of the Bank and there is hardly any prescribed limitation available and as such the case of the petitioner is fully covered with the latest scheme.

¶11

Learned counsel for the responding bank vehmently opposed the arguments as raised by learned counsel for the petitioner by way of raising his arguments that the case of the petitioner shall be covered from the date when the father of the petitioner died in harness and that was the year 2018 and no new policy was existing at that time, precisely by bare perusal of the policy introduced in the year 2021 is having its prospective effect.

¶12

In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances arguments as advanced by learned counsel for the responding bank seems to be forceful.

¶13

Writ petition stands dismissed .

¶14

Order Date :- 29.5.2023 Rakesh

¶15

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lalit Kumar v. Union Of India and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalit Kumar v. Union Of India and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Govind Prasad Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Others

Ram Mohan Prasad Vs State of U.P. and Others

Smt. Ahmadunnisa Vs State of U.P. and Others

Ganga Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajeev Kumar Vs Additional Chier Secretary and 5 Others

Mahesh Chandra Saraswat Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others