LPA No. 126 of 2008. 20.11.2008. Present: Mr.Lalit Kumar Sharma, counsel for the appellant. C.M.P. (M) No.1016 of 2008: For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The application stands disposed of accordingly. LPA No.126 of 2008: This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court, dated 13.8.2008, passed in CWP No.85 of 2005, whereby he has dismissed the writ petition filed by the present appellant praying that he be given compassionate appointment in place of his father. The undisputed facts are that Shri Gandhi Ram Verma, father of the appellant/petitioner, was employed as a Clerk in State Bank of India. He expired in the year 2002. The present petitioner, being the son, applied for being granted appointment on compassionate basis under the Kith and Kin Policy. This application was rejected by the appropriate authority on the ground that keeping in view the overall position of the assets and liabilities/income and financial position of the family, no ground is made out for grant of compassionate appointment. Thereafter, the present appellant filed an application stating therein that his mother is suffering from cancer and a lot of money has to be spent on her treatment. In this representation the petitioner did not specify the exact amount which was being spent on her treatment. This application was also rejected on 3.6.2004, leading to the filing of the writ petition. -2- The Bank contested the petition. It is not disputed that as per the Policy governing compassionate appointments, the financial condition of the family is the main point to be taken in consideration for grant of compassionate appointment. The learned Single Judge has noted that the legal heirs of the deceased got Rs.9,49,418/- towards terminal benefits on the death of the deceased, another sum of Rs.3.00 lacs on account of the PPF and more than Rs.1.00 lac as LIC. Therefore, the total amount received by them was almost Rs.14.00 lacs. In addition thereto, the widow is getting pension and the pension payable at the relevant time including DA was about Rs.6,500/-. The learned Single Judge on this basis came to the conclusion that no hardship is being caused to the family and, therefore, rejected the writ petition. Mr.Lalit Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant, has urged that the learned Single Judge had not taken into consideration the fact that the mother of the appellant is suffering from cancer. Neither in the writ petition nor before us any details have been given with regard to the expenditure, if any, being incurred by the appellant or other family members on the treatment of the mother of the appellant. There is not even a whisper in the petition in this regard. Even in the grounds of appeal, though this is the main ground taken, no details of the expenditure have been given. Even before the learned Single Judge, despite repeated opportunities granted, no rejoinder was filed countering the averments made by the bank in its reply. Mr.Lalit Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant, has also urged that the Bank should have taken into consideration the fact that -3- the mother of the appellant is getting treatment for cancer. Even if it is assumed that the mother of the appellant is suffering from cancer, this by itself is not a ground to grant compassionate employment. Compassionate appointment has to be granted if the family is in penury. To establish the fact that the family is in penury, it was for the appellant to have placed material on record before the learned Single Judge to show as to what is the amount of expenditure being incurred on the treatment of the mother of the appellant. No such averments have been made. Keeping in view the fact that the mother of the appellant received a huge amount on account of the death of Shri Gandhi Ram Verma, no ground is made out for interference with the judgment of the learned Single Judge. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed in limine. (Deepak Gupta), Judge. November 20, 2008. (V.K. Ahuja), (TILAK) Judge.