Dismissed

Jayanand Hemant Chavan v. Bank of India through Zonal Manager

Bombay HC12 Dec 2022WP/9131/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition seeks appointment for the petitioner's father under the compassionate scheme. The High Court quashed the rejection, holding that with a family income of Rs. 65,000, the petitioner failed to show financial destitution required for such appointment.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition rejected; application for appointment under compassionate scheme denied.

Jayanand Hemant Chavan Vs Bank of India… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

WP 9131-2021.doc

¶2

Anand

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 9131 OF 2021

¶5

Jayanand Hemant Chavan

.Petitioner

Vs.

Bank of India

.Respondent

Mr. Mahesh V. Rawool, Advocate, for the Petitioner Ms Ranjana Todankar a/w Ms Sonali Humane, Advocate, for the Respondent

¶11

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, ACJ. AND S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.

¶12

DATE : 12 DECEMBER 2022

¶13

P. C.

¶14

. The claim of the Petitioner for appointment under the Compassionate Scheme is negatived by the Respondent – Bank

¶15

and aggrieved thereby, he has fled present Petition.

¶16

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that father

¶17

of the Petitioner was working with the Respondent – Bank and on 25.05.2015, he died. The Petitioner, immediately on 10.07.2015, fled an Application with the Respondent – Bank seeking an appointment on compassionate scheme. The same has been rejected. According to the learned counsel for the Petitioner, in deserving cases, even when there is already an earning member in the family, a dependent family member may be considered for

¶18

1 of 3

¶19

WP 9131-2021.doc

¶20

compassionate appointment. This aspect has not been considered by the Respondent – Bank. The Respondent – Bank has also not extended an opportunity to the Petitioner to submit its case before them. The principles of natural justice are violated. According to the learned counsel, only because mother of the Petitioner is an earning member of the family is not suffcient to reject the claim of the Petitioner.

¶21

Learned counsel for the Respondent – Bank relies upon Clause 5 of the Scheme for compassionate appointment governing it. According to the learned counsel, monthly income of the family of the Petitioner is Rs. 65,000/-. In view of that, the Petitioner is rightly not considered.

¶22

4. We have considered the submissions.

¶23

Compassionate appointment is not a matter of right.

¶24

The purpose and object behind giving appointment on compassionate ground is to provide immediate assistance to the family of the deceased who died in harping.

¶25

The Respondent has placed on record an income proof of the family of the Petitioner. The same, according to them,

¶26

2 of 3

¶27

WP 9131-2021.doc

¶28

is Rs. 65,000/- per month. The salary slip of the mother of the Petitioner is also placed on record to substantiate the said fact.

¶29

Clause 5 of the Scheme framed for compensation by

¶30

the Respondent – Bank reads thus :-

¶31

“5. ELIGIBILITY

¶32

5.1 The family is indigent and deserves immediate assistance for relief from fnancial destitution; and

¶33

5.2 Applicant for compassionate appointment should be eligible and suitable for the post in all respects under the provisions of the relevant Recruitment Rules.”

¶34

Clause 10 of the said scheme relied upon by the Petitioner is for the benefts of the Petitioner, inasmuch, as the Respondent – Bank is required to consider source of income available with the family is not suffcient to support other members of the family. In the present case, it does not appear that the Petitioner is not in a position to demonstrate as to how Rs. 65,000/- is not suffcient to maintain his family.

¶35

In the light of above, no case is made out for interference. The Writ Petition is rejected. No costs.

¶36

( S. G. Chapalgaonkar, J. ) ( S. V. Gangapurwala, ACJ. )

¶37

3 of 3

Jayanand Hemant Chavan v. Bank of India through Zonal Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayanand Hemant Chavan v. Bank of India through Zonal Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prashant Shankar Bhosale Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Chief Secretary and Ors.

Anandrao Maruti Pachatake Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Principal Secretary Dept. of Revenue and Forest and Ors.

Jayanand Hemant Chavan Vs Bank of India through Zonal Manager