Disposed

Smt. Farzana Zaheerunnisa v. The Union of India

Telangana HC11 Jun 2025WP/19204/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition by the widow and children of a deceased State Bank of Hyderabad clerk seeking compassionate appointment under the 2014 scheme despite payment of ex-gratia. The court held ex-gratia does not bar compassionate appointment and disposed of the writ directing the bank to reconsider representations with personal hearing within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to reconsider the petitioners' representations for compassionate appointment afresh, without reference to the impugned letter dated 11.04.2015, after personal hearing and enquiry,

Smt. Farzana Zaheerunnisa Vs The Union of India — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

132521

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH^{DAY OF JUNE} TWO THOUSAND AND^TWENTYFIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS^{JUSTICESUREPALLI NANDA}

¶6

WRIT PETITIO^{N NO: 19204OF 2020}

¶7

Between

¶8

Smt Farzana Zaheerunnisa, Wo.^{Late Shaik Ghouseuddin, A'la '} t4 -yeqlsl Occ HorsetrofO, R/; H No 96, ll^{floor', Karkhana, Secunderabad,T S -500} 011

¶9

2 Shaik Faizari, S/o.^{Late Shaik Ghouseuddin,Aged 20 years,Occ Student'} Rio. H.No.96, ll floor,^{Karkhana, Secunderabad, T S -500 011'}

¶10

3 Shaik Sohaibuddin,^{S/o. Late Shaik Ghouseuddin,Aged 19 y.e1s.O-c^c.} Student, All are R/o.^{H.No.96, ll floor, Karkhana,Secunderabad' ls-5uu} 011

¶11

.....PETITIONERS

¶12

AND

¶13

The Union of lndia,^{rep. by its Secretary, lvlinistryof Finance, Departmentof} Financial Services,^{New Delhi- 1 10001.}

¶14

2 The Manaqinq Director, State^{Bankof lndia, Central Office, StateBank} Bhavan, Iviadim Cama^{Road,Mumbai-400021}

¶15

The Chief General^{Manager, State Bankof india, Telangana State,Local} Head Office, Koti, Hyderabad.^{- 500 095}

¶16

4.TheStateBankofHyderabad,nowmergedwithStateBankoflndia,DGtt/|,' Zonal Office, 3rd floor,^{Patny Circle, SeCunderabad- 500.003'}

¶17

.....RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition Under Article^{226 of the constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in^{the affidavit filed therewith,the High court may be} pleased to issue any appropriate^{writ, order or direction more particularly in the} nature of writ of^{Mandamus declare that the dependentsof the deceased family} shaik Ghousuddin^{(who worked as DECO at SBH, Chiklcadpallybranch,} Hyderabad died in^{harness) are entitledfor appointmenton compassionate}

¶19

iqE:t,'*:Sz-- -E:trt1,;id!t^E t,

¶20

grounds in view of the Scheme 2014 dehorse the payment of Ex-Gratia amountⁱⁿ Scheme 2005^"1 mpug ned Proceedings No. PER/GR.Vl lllc^{A1312dated1 1 -4-2015} is incorporated" and the action of the respondents not considering the^{case of the} pelitioners for compassionate appointment in addition to payment of Ex-Gratia^is illegal, arbitrary and malafide and violation of article^{'14, -16} and 21^and consequently direct the respondents to consider the claim of the^{petitioners for} compassionate^g rou nd

¶21

(As per Court Order dated 11-4-2025 vide l.A.No.1 ot 2025 in WP.No.19204 of 2020 in the prayer portion)

¶22

l.A.NO:1 OF 2020

¶23

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated^ln the affidavit filed in sr.rpport of the petition, the High Court may be^pleased to direct the respondent rlo.2 to appoint the Petitioner No.2 in suitable^post as^per the Scheme 2014 pending disposal of the main case.

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI MAMIDI VENU MADHAV

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 : SRI T.KOTESWARA RAO, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR STATE BANK OF INDIA

¶27

The Court made the following ORDER

¶28

HON,BLE^{MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA}

¶29

I 1 20 f o2

¶30

ORD ER:

¶31

Heard Sri^{Mamidi Venu Madhav' learned counsel} appearing^{on behalf of the petitioners' Sri Gadi Praveen} Kumar, learned^{Deputy Solicitor General of India' appeartng} on behalf of^{respondent No'1 and Sri T' KoteswaraRao'} learned^{counselfor state Bank of India' appearing on behalf} of resPondent^No.2'

¶32

2 T it ne le th w ti n e ln t

¶33

followin^qrelief:

¶34

"... to issue^{any appropriate writ' orderor directionmore} particularly in^{the nature of Writ of Mandamusdeclaring} that the^{dependentsofthe deceasedfamilyShaik} Ghousuddin^{(who worked as DECO at SBH'Chikkadpally} are entitled^for branch,^{HYderabaddied inharness)} appointment^{on compassionate grounds} tn view of the Scheme 2Ol4^{de horse the paymentof Ex-Gratia amountin} No PER/GR Scheme^{2005 ImPugnedProceeding} action of^the VIlllCA/3Lz^{Dated 11-04-2015and the} respondents^{not consideringthe case of the petitioners for} compassionate^{appointmentin addition to paymentof Ex-} Gratia is^{illegal, arbitrary and mala fideand violation of} Articles 14;^{L6 and 2landconsequently direct the} respondents^{to considerthe claim of the petitioners for} compassionate^ground Pass" "''

¶35

¶36

SN, I wP 19204 2020

¶37

The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that the husband of lst petitioner shaik Ghausuddin had worked as crerk-cum-Cashier at SBH, Chikkadpally Branch, Hyderabad. On 07.I7.ZOi4 white driving two wheeler, the 1.t petitioner,s husb,and colluded with a divider and sustained head injury and subsequenfly died in harness on 25.11.2014 at Sunshine Hospital, Secunderabad. On 23.03.2015, 1't petitioner applied for compassionate appointment under a Scheme for Compassionate Appointment in public Sector Banks which was introduced by the Government of India w.e.f. 05.08.2014. Under the said Scheme 2014, the employees of the bank, who died while in service, the dependent family members of the deceased employee including spouse, chilclren and dependent family members are entifled for compassionate appointment. The 1't petitioner applied for compassionate appointment on 23.L2.20I4, 23.03.2015 and 29.06.2015, but the SBH head office issued the impugned order pER/GR.VilI/CA/312, dated 11.04.2015 stating that 1st petitioner is not entifled for compassionate appointment. It is Further case of the petitioners that the Scheme 20L4 is applicable to the petitioners but the respondent Bank denied the request of the petitioners made vide the said representations. Aggrieved by the impugned proceeding No.

¶38

¶39

SN, J wP 19204 2020

¶40

PER/GR Vlll/CA/3Lz^{Dated 11'04'2015,the petitioner approached} the Court^{by filing the present writ petition'}

¶41

PE s DT RE RD

¶42

(A) T r u R R III 3 at L 4- 15 u h e n na Re na H er d ct he n r

¶43

.'SBH

¶44

HEAD OFFICE,^GUNFOUNDRY, STATE BANK^{OF HYDERABAD} HYDERABAD -^{5OOOO1. A.P.} PERSONAL^DEPARTMENT HEAD OFFICE,^HYDERABAD PER/GR.VIII/CA'/312 DATE : 11.04.2015.

¶45

Staff-Award-late^{Sri Shaik Ghousuddin,PF:192924} '^Cashier/ ;i;;i.;t'ttii.il;p"ttv^{utun.n expired'on 25'11'2014 - Request for} appointment^{on compassionategrounds'}

¶46

Please refer^{to yourletter no'F/Statfl5297 dated 24'03'2015 on} the captioned^subject.

¶47

In terms of^{guidelinesin vogue as envisagedin Ho circularNo'} 'prdlioro--rris3 dated :-o.oa.zorr PEN2oTs-t612 dated b7.o+.zors ihe^{requests for appointment on compassionate} ue lxaminea^{and consideredin respect of casesof} ;;nJ;ill dependents^of:

¶48

Emolovees die^{while performinghis official duty' as a result of} ,ioLni", terrorism,^{robbery or decoity'}

¶49

Employees^{die within five yearsof his. first appolntment or before} i"'j[i,ils-,n;^{age of 30 years,.} .whichever^{is later' leavinga} olpena6nt^{spouie and/or minorchildren'}

¶50

Th rs tns^{ta rit} se, sth est the ADD ant oes ot e ti e mln and rocess the request of the a^olicant.

'-;4,j

SN, J wP 19204 2020

He t u d a m of ti u u m tn e e ro the te this H n PE 2 13 134 dated 5.O7 .2()r &P Rl2,J15-1 12d ted. 4.20 5.

¶55

Siqned/_ Deputy General uanager lnn),,.

¶56

(B) T es em f a ron te oi m !n bti ec rBa e 5 .20 4vi CM ist off an D.O. F.No. 1a/2t 2013-IRdated .8.2 014) !n rticular o ra N .8 is extracte hereu nder:

¶57

*8. TIME TIMIT FOR CONSIDERING APPLTCATIONS

¶58

8.1. Application for employment under the Scheme from eligible dependent should normally be considered upto five years from the date of death or.retirement on medical grounds and decision to be taken on merit in each case.

¶59

8.2. However, Ba nk can cons ider reo uest for como as sionate ao oint ent ven when the dea th or retirement onm edical roun s th m ee ok a n ack ev fiv rsa ile nsid fln such elat re ests sh td however, be kept in view that the concept of compassionate appointment is largely related to the need for immediate assistance to the family of the employee in order to relieve it from economic distress. The very fact that the family has been able to manage somehow all these years should normally be taken as adequate proof that the family had some dependable means of subsistence.. Therefore, examination of such cases would call for a great deal of circumspection. The decision to make appointment on

¶60

¶61

SN. J wI 19204²⁰²⁰

¶62

co a n SU hc^ses a h f nl t B rdl vel"

¶63

¶64

e a d he under:

¶65

"8. It is submitted^{that the petitionerafter receiv'ng ex-} gratia amount^{of Rs.12 lakhsin the month of October'2015} has maintained^{completesilence and stated tohave} requestecl for^{the compassionateappointmentto her once} again after^{a periodof almostthree years and threemonths} by another^{representation datedL2'12'2O19 addressed to the} Chairman^{and Managing Director of the State Bank of India} at Mumbai^{withoutroutingher application throughproper} channel^{whichshehas been doing all along'Itis earnestlv} r I 2 1 r t ve e re iv bv the r^{esDondenbank".}

¶66

D scussr^ON ND co CLUsro

¶67

The compassionate^{appointment scheme revisedin the year} 2O:^.4 i.e.^{the Scheme for Compassionate appointmenton} tn excePtional^{cases in State Bank of} compassionate^grounds Para No.3^{of the said Scheme is extracted hereunder:} Hyderabad 1 I E at n e o e lic B

¶68

=€

¶69

¶70

SN, J wP t9204 2020

¶71

lu DSUma mount. Accordingly, the Bank has decided to continue the scheme for compassionate appointment in exceptional circumstances with certain modifications in terms and conditions. The whole object of offering compassionate employment in such exceptional cases is to enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis due to death bf bread winner. The mere death of an employee in harness does not enti e his family to such a source of livelihood. The obiect is to r SI t n h th Ba is satis ted that the fi anci al co ditionof the milv ts such that but for the pro vtsion of emD lovm ent he mr wt o e e me th crr

¶72

A bare perusal of the para No.3 of the said Scheme 2014 clearry indicates that ail the pubric Sector Banks can have both the options i.e. conrpassionate appointment or payment of ex_gratia lump sum amount, and hence therefore it is evident that apart from payme nt or ex gratia rump sum amount, scheme for compassionate appointment can also be considered. A bare perusal of the scheme does not indicate that if exgratia is released compassionate appointment cannot be requeste(l by the children or spouse of the deceased employee.

¶73

This Court opines that the order impugned dated 11.04.2015 issued by the Deputy Generat Manager, Regional Office, Hyderabad is without apptication of mind, and rrassed in a routine, mc(:hanicat manner without

¶74

¶75

SN, J wP t9204 2020

¶76

considering the object of the scheme. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the writ petition could be disposed of directing the respondents 2 and 3 to consider petitioners representation dated 24.C,3.2015 duly considering representation of the l"t petitioner dated 3O.O9.2O15 and 29.06.2015 addressed to the 3'd respondent herein and 1st petitioner,s representation , dated 12.12.2O19 seeking appointment on compassionate ground addressed to the 2nd and 3'd respondents herein as per the revised scheme i.e. Scheme for appointment on compassionate grounds in exceptional cases in State Bank of Hyderabad, in accordance to law.

¶77

The earnedc ounsel Al, earl no onb ehalf of the resDondents does not dispute the said submtssrons made bv e learn cou ns eari n nb of th tion ou h ific aken ar of th oun affidavit filed n behalf f the resoondents ( rred and extra cted above) that the reoresentation dated 12.1 .2019 said o have b n submitte dbvtheo etitioner was not received bv the r soondent bank, which owever ts denied bv he learned counsel aDDearlno on behalf of the petitioner.

SN, J wP 19204 2020

The object of compassionate appointment is a socia! security measure to support the family of the deceased government servant, who dies in harness. The aim and object of the policy for compassionate appoint.nent is to provide financial support to the family of the clecdased employee, who left the dependents in distress and penury. The core aim of the object of providing compassionatc appointment is to relieve thc family from financia! sufferings being faced for the sudden demise of the Bread Winner of the family. The sufferings being faced by the dependents of the deceased employeq for sudden demise of the Bread Winner could be solved for some extent by providing compassionate appointment to one of the dependents of the deceased employee to look after the family. The said relief shoutd not be denied and hence the petitioner's request for compassionate appointment cannot be e e unil eral m nica I I a tin ca manner defeatino the v rv obi ct of the co Dass ionate ADDointment without condu ctinq anv enquirv whether I ner f wl h th sai u icl ti es ex !ntn oetitioner laim bv ami ninq t e petitioner relevant

SN, J wP 19204 2020

)

documents in support of^petitioners case, statinq that the apolicant does not fall under the ouidelines in voque.

¶87

Takino into consid eration:

¶88

(a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the

¶89

case,

¶90

(b) The submissions of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents,

¶91

¶92

(d) Clause 3 of the Scheme for appointment on compassionate grounds in exceptional cases in State Bank of Hyderabad (referred to and extracted above),

¶93

(e) Para '8' of the Scheme for Compassionate appointment in public sector Banks (w.e.f.) O5.08.2O14 vide Ministry of Finance D.O.F.No.18 /212O13-lR dated O7.O8.2014 (referred to and extracted above),

¶94

Without going into the merits of the rival contentions put forth by both the learned counsel on record, upon consent, the present writ petition is disposed of directing the 3'd respondent to consider the l"t petitioner's

¶95

¶96

SN, J wP 19204 2020

¶97

representation dated 29.05.2015 and 3O.09.2O15 addressed to the 3'd respondent and l"t petitioner's representation dated 12.12.2019 seeking appointment on compassionate grounds addressed to the 2"d and 3'd respondent duly reconsidering petitioners earlier representation dated 24.O3.2OL5 without reference to the impugned letter dated 11.04.2015 issued by the Deputy General Manager, Regional Office, Hyderabad in accordance to law, in conformity with principtes of natural justice by providing an opportunaty of personal hearing to the petitioners, cluly taking into consideration the Sclreme for appointment on compassionate grounds in exceptional cases in state Bank of Hyderabad, duty examining the r6levant documents in support of petitioner's case by conducting due enquiry as per due procedure, and pass appropriate orders within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶98

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if

¶99

any pending, in the Writ Petition shall also stand closed.

¶100

SD/.A. PRATHIMA EPUTY REGISTRAR

¶101

//TRUE COPY'

¶102

SECTION^OFFICER

¶103

To 1 The Secretary,^{Unionof lndia, Ministry of Finance' Department of Financial} Services,^{New Delhi- 110001'}

¶104

The Managing^{Drrector,StateBankof lndia' Central OfficeStateBank} Bhavan,^{ruaLOimCama Road, Mumbai-400 021} ..

¶105

The chief^{Generat rvranagli, 'state Bankof lndia, Telanganastate, Local} Head Office,^{Koti, Hyderabad- 500 095'}

ptr.\

irir,^{-;,a.': ,t} l

4 The State Bank of Hyderabad, now merged with State Bank of lndia, DGM, _^{Zonal Office,3rd floor, patny Circle Secunderabad-} 500 003. 5. One CC to SRt MAMtDt VENU MADHAV, Advocate tOpUCl 6 One CC to SRt GAD| PRAVEEN KUIMAR, DEpUTy SOL|C|TOR GENERAL OF lNDlA, Advocate [OPUC]

¶112

One CC to SRt T.KOTES\I/ARA RAO. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR STATE BANK OF lNDtA. Advocate (OpUC)

B Two CD Copies

(

) )

C.C. TODAY

HIGH COURT

DATED:1X10612025

v -; iF
F'
.s
t
$
'rlt
\
gtH *

¶122

ORDER

¶123

WP.No.19204 of 2020

¶124

DISPOSING CIF THE W.P

¶125

WITHOUT COSTS. ($-

¶126

t5
tt

Smt. Farzana Zaheerunnisa v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Farzana Zaheerunnisa v. The Union of India

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

Chiluka Sadaiah Vs The Singareni Collieries Company Limited and 4 others

K. Komaraiah and another Vs Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited. (Tsspdcl) and 3 others

Maddela Rayappa Vs The State of Telangana

R.Bal Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

M.Srinivas Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Cheva Mallaiah Vs The Singareni Collieries Company Limited and 2 others