Priyanka Ghosh vs Union Of India & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 3159 Cal

10.06.2022           IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Sl. No.1           CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
   (PP)                   APPELLATE SIDE


                           WPA 6129 of 2022

                            Priyanka Ghosh
                                  Vs.
                          Union of India & Ors.


                  Mr. Baidurya Ghosal,
                  Ms. Sweta Bhatta
                                              ....for the petitioner.

                  Mr. Subrata Kumar Sinha
                             ....for the respondent nos.2, 3 & 4.

The petitioner's father while working in State

Bank of India died on 19th November, 2019 leaving

behind his widow, Minati Ghosh and three unmarried

daughters. The petitioner is one of the unmarried

daughters, who had made an application for

appointment on compassionate ground. The

application was made on 18th October, 2021. The

petitioner's application has been rejected on the

ground that there was no scheme in subsistence for

granting appointment on compassionate ground when

the petitioner's father died. There is no dispute as

regard to the fact that there was no scheme prevalent

in State Bank of India (in short SBI), the employer for

granting compassionate appointment on the date of

death of the employee, that is, 19th November, 2019,

save except two exceptions which are as follows:-

"i. Employee dying while performing his official duty, as a result of violence, terrorism, robbery or dacoity.

ii. Employee dying within five years of his first appointment or before reaching the age of 30 years, whichever is later, leaving a dependent spouse and/or minor children."

It appears from the report in the form of an

affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent nos.2, 3 and

4, i.e., SBI that the scheme which was applicable to

an employee in case of death-in-harness on 19th

November, 2019 was one dated 4th August, 2005.

This scheme appears at pages 17-32 of the report of

SBI. The exceptional circumstances as stated

hereinabove was introduced by a circular in terms of

a decision taken at the meeting of the Executive

Committee of the Central Board of SBI held on 12th

May, 2011. This circular is at pages 33-34 of the

report.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances and in

light of the ratio laid down in the judgment in

Secretary to Government, Department of Education

(Primary) and Others Vs. Bheemesh Alias

Bheemappa, reported in AIR 2022 SC 402, the

petitioner is not entitled to compassionate

appointment as claimed as on the date of death of the

petitioner's father, being the relevant date, no scheme

was there for compassionate appointment.

The writ petition so far as it relates to the claim

for compassionate appointment is dismissed.

However, dismissal of the writ petition will not

prevent the family of the deceased employee from

receiving other benefits available under the scheme

dated 4th August, 2005, if entitled to. SBI shall

consider the case of the petitioner in respect of other

benefits available under the scheme dated 4th August,

2005 as expeditiously as possible, but not beyond

three months from date.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if

applied for, be given to the parties, upon compliance

of necessary formalities.

(Arindam Mukherjee, J.)