IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 2279 of 2008 DATE OF DECISION : 18.03.2009 Smt. Kitabo Devi .... PETITIONER Versus Union of India and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. Ravi Partap Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Arun Bakhshi, Advocate, for Mr. Naveen Chopra, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. A.S. Gagrha, Advocate, for respondents No.2 and 3. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the orders dated 7.12.2005 (Annexure P-1) and 12.7.2006 (Annexure P-2), passed by two separate officers of the Haryana Gramin Bank, Rohtak (hereinafter referred to as `the respondent bank'), whereby the prayer of the petitioner for appointing her son Rakesh Kumar Ola as Clerk cum Cashier on compassionate ground has been declined, on the ground that the dependent of the deceased employee has got sufficient means and is not in a CWP No. 2279 of 2008 -2- penurious condition and further that his case is also not covered by the Scheme applicable to the respondent bank in this regard. Undisputedly, Shri Suraj Bhan Ola - husband of the petitioner was working as Class I Officer at Branch Office of the respondent bank at Loharu. He expired on 19.3.2005, leaving behind his wife, one son and four daughters. Admittedly, he was owning 51 Kanals 3 Marlas of well irrigated agricultural land in village Kushal Pura, Tehsil Loharu, District Bhiwani. After his death, the said land has been inherited by Rakesh Kumar Ola, being the only son of the deceased, and the same is under his self cultivation. It is also not disputed that after the death of Suraj Bhan Ola, an amount of Rs. 8.76 lacs has been paid to his legal heirs as terminal benefits i.e. Gratuity, Contributory Provident Fund, Leave encashment, Group Insurance Scheme etc. In the written statement, filed on behalf of respondents No.2 and 3, it has been stated that the claim of the petitioner has been considered under the Scheme for Appointment of Dependents of Deceased Employees on Compassionate Grounds in Regional Rural Banks, which has been circulated by National Bank for Agriculture & Rural Development, Mumbai to all the Regional Rural Banks. As per clause 3 of the said Scheme, the appointment under the Scheme can be made in Clerical and Subordinate cadres only. Since the husband of the petitioner was working as Class I Officer in the respondent bank, therefore, the case of the petitioner for appointment of her son on compassionate ground is not covered by the said Scheme. Secondly, dependent of the deceased employee CWP No. 2279 of 2008 -3- has got sufficient assets and is not in a penurious condition. Therefore, prayer of the petitioner to give the aforesaid appointment to her son was considered and declined. I have heard counsel for the parties. In my view, the claim of the petitioner for ex-gratia employment has been rightly rejected on the aforesaid two grounds. Counsel for the petitioner has not disputed the aforesaid facts. In view of these facts, claim of the petitioner's son for compassionate appointment is not covered by the aforesaid Scheme. On the death of an employee, ex-gratia employment cannot be claimed as a matter of right by his dependent. This right flows under a Scheme which is applicable in a particular department. It is not the case of the petitioner that the Scheme framed in this case is un-reasonable or arbitrary. Therefore, the respondents have rightly rejected the claim of the petitioner and I do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned orders. Dismissed. March 18, 2009 ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) ndj JUDGE