[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Meena Dhaigude vs State Bank Of India on 7 January, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:347
1 WP-45201-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE JAI KUMAR PILLAI
ON THE 7 th OF JANUARY, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 45201 of 2025
MEENA DHAIGUDE
Versus
STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Mr. A.K.Chitale, senior counsel assisted by Mr. Kartik Chitale,
counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Arpit Guru, counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2.
ORDER
With the consent of parties, heard finally.
Heard on the question of admission.
2. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:-
7.1 The petitioner prays for payment of pension, gratuity, family
pension an ex-gratia amount till full payment thereafter until now in terms of
paras 17 and 18 of the judgment dated 29.05.2025, Annexure-P/5 of the
learned Division Bench of Shri Justice Subodh Abhyankar and Shri Justice
Pranay Verma in Writ Appeal No.827 of 2021 decided on 16.08.2022.
7.2 Entire costs of this writ petition.
7.3 Such further or other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit.
3. Learned senior counsel has drawn the attention of this Court
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:347
2 WP-45201-2025
towards Annexure-P/5 which is order passed by the Division Bench in Writ
Appeal No.823/2021 dated 16.08.2022, wherein paras 17 and 18 of the order
of Division Bench has specifically directed the bank to release all the dues
which are still pending with the respondents/bank within a period of four
weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Further the
Division Bench has also given certain directions to be complied with by the
bank as per para 18 of the said order. He has further invited the court's
attention regarding para 17 of the order which has not been complied with
the respondents/bank and has not released the ex-gratia amount till date to
the petitioner despite the fact that there is a specific direction of Division
Bench, as aforesaid.
4. Considering the request/prayer made by the learned senior counsel
for the petitioner and not disputed by the counsel for the respondents/bank,
the petitioner has made an application few days back before the bank for
release of the ex-gratia amount which has not been released yet, therefore the
respondents/bank is directed to release the same, as expeditiously as
possible. However, taking into consideration the submissions of counsel for
the petitioner, this court deems fit that since there is already an order passed
by the writ court on 16.08.2022 in which there was a clear direction to the
bank to clear all the dues of the petitioner within a period of four weeks from
the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Since the respondents/bank
has not release the said amount to the petitioner within the said period,
therefore the bank is directed to release the amount with 8% interest per
annum from the date when the writ court has directed to pay i.e. from
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:347
3 WP-45201-2025
September 2022 and the interest shall be calculated till the date it is paid. So
far as the other directions are concerned, it is made clear that since the
petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment has been rejected only
because she could not file her application for compassionate appointment
when policy was in force.
5. Further, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner has made a
prayer that petitioner being a model employer, the case of one of the son's of
petitioner should be considered for temporary appointment with the bank. It
is also prayed by learned senior counsel if any vacancy arose with the bank,
any one of the son's of petitioner be given preference on such employment
on temporary basis by outsourcing the employment so that they may earn
their livelihood. It goes without saying that the respondents/bank shall extend
all cooperation by giving employment to one of the son's of the petitioner on
temporary basis by taking into consideration the required qualifications
acquired by the sons of the petitioner. Let the said exercise be done by the
respondents/bank within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of
certified copy of this order.
6. With the aforesaid observation, this petition stands disposed of, in
above terms.
7. Certified copy, as per Rules.
(JAI KUMAR PILLAI)
JUDGE
Arun/-
