Amit Kumar filed a writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus to declare his father an employee who died in harness and to claim compassionate appointment. The High Court observed that the father had not questioned the voluntary retirement during his lifetime and dismissed the petition summarily as barred by laches.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:174149
Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17302 of 2024
Petitioner :- Amit Kumar Respondent :- Ms Bank Of Baroda And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashutosh Sharma,Nitesh Kumar Jauhari Counsel for Respondent :- Anadi Krishna Narayana
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner Mr. Ashutosh Sharma in support of this petition at great length and also Mr. Ashok Trivedi, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of all the respondents.
The petitioner challenges an order dated 13.09.2014 by which the Bank have declined to hold that the voluntary retirement granted to the petitioner's father was vitiated in any manner.
The petitioner has sought a mandamus of this Court commanding the respondents to treat the petitioner's father as an employee of the Bank, who died in harness. Perhaps, the petitioner desires to stake his claim for compassionate appointment.
Apparently, the petitioner's father was granted voluntary retirement way back on 11.09.2014 and died on 01.02.2015. While in service, the petitioner's father never questioned his voluntary retirement from service and it is the petitioner, who, after the deceasedemployee is no more, seeks to question the employee's voluntary retirement for obvious gains.
Moreover, the order impugned was passed ten years ago and the petitioner has brought this writ petition for the first time after a decade. The petition is apparently barred by latches as well. There is also no infirmity in the order impugned ex-facie.
This petition is summarily dismissed .
Order Date :- 6.11.2024 Vijay
Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KUMAR SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a voluntary retirement suitably challenged after death for the purpose of compassionate appointment can be quashed.
Whether a writ petition filed ten years after the impugned order is barred by laches.
Amit Kumar
Bank of Baroda
Munir
Sahu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
