IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (C.G.) WRIT PETITION N0. ^^ / 2005 PETITIONER: RESPONDENTS: .'^. Smt Sukanti Naik, W/o Late Shri Bhaskar Naik, aged about 42 years, R/o Kumharpara Santoshi Ward, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh VERSUS -V "w:l ^ 1. The Chief General Manager State Bank oflndia, Local Head Office, Hoshangabad Road, Bhopal (M.P.) 2. The Dy. General Manager, State Bank oflndia, Zonal Office, Near Chhattisgarh College, Raipur (C.G.) 3. The Asst. General Manager, State Bankoflndia, Regional Office, Region-4, Dharampura Road, Jagdalpur, DistrictBastar,(C.G.). 4. The ChiefManager State Bank oflndia, Main Branch Jagdalpur, Dist.Bastar, (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUENCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, PROHIBTION, CERTIORARI, AND ANY OTHER WRITS, DIRECTIONS OR ORDERS. ^ 4-F/^ HI^H COURT OF CHHATTIS^ARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition No 5715 of 2005 Petitioner Smt. Sukanti Naik Versus Kespondents The Chief Seneral Mcuiager, State Boaik of India oyid otiiers Post for order on -2-7 pebnjary, 2007 Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge HZ6H COURT OF CHHATTIS^RH AT BILASPUR Writ Petltion No. 5715 of 2005 Petitioner Smt. Sukanti Naik Versus Respondents The Chief General M<mager, State Bank of India.and others Sir^Se Bench: Hbn'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Ayiihotri. Present: Mr. Abk Dewangan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Semjay K. Agrawal, Advoaxte for the rcspondents. ORDER (Passed on ....^?....Day of February, 2007) The foiiowing order of the Court was passed by Satish K< Agnjhotri, J. 1. By fnss petition, the petitioner seeks a writ/direction to the respondents to appoint the petitioner on compassiotwte basss with heavy compensation, for not appointing the petitioner immediately on death of her Jate husband, 2. Tne indisputable facts, in nutshell, ore that the husband of the petitioner, namely, Shri Bhaskar Naik, while working as Security 6uard in the State Borsk of India, Main Branch, JagAilpur, District- Bastar, died in harness on 6-7-2000 (Annexure P-2). The deceased Seft behind the petitioner three daughters and one minor son, ,0 3. The petitioner made an o^piication for her oppointtnent on compassionate basis- The Statc Bank of India-respondents by communication dated 22-7-2005 (Annexure P-1) snformed to the petitioner that her income wois found sufficient to tide over the financial crisss befallen on the famijy after death of the deceased husbaid. 4. Learned coun^sl appearin9 for the petitioner submits that the petitioner being dependent of "rfie deceased husband is entitled to compassionate appointment in accordonce with scheme for oppointment on compassionate ground for dependent of decea^d/employee retired on medical ground of 1+ie State Bank of India-respondents (Annexure R-l). Clau^; 10 of the Scheme provides that ctetermining 1+ie finouicial condition of the family is therefore, oin importflytt criterion for deciding the proposals for compassionate oppointment. CJGU^B 10 of the Scheme reads <as under:- "10 Finoiicjaj Condition of the family Appointments in the public services are made strictly on the basis of open invitatjon of applications anc! merit. However, exceptions are made in favour of dependents of employees dying in harness and leaving their family in penury and without ony meayis of Isvelihood. Oetermining the fincxncial condition of the family 'is therefore, cn important criterion for deciding the proposals for compassionate cppointment. The folbwing foictors should be taken into account for determfning the financial condition of 1+ie family-' ^ (i) Family pension (^ _![. 6. (ii) gratuity amount received (iii) employee's/employer's contnbution to Provident Fund (iv) any compansation paid by the Bank or its VVetfare Fund (v) proceeds of LIC Policies and other investments of the deceased employe® (vi) income of famiiy from other sources (vii) income of other famiiy members from employment, or other sourc^s (viii) size of the fQmily and verifiable liabilities, if any\" The respondents in its reply submitted that the monfnly income of the petitioner's famiiy is Rs. 3121/- as per actual figures when the carry home ^ijary of 1+ie deceased husbwid was Rs. 3657/-, The brief particubrs arc as under:- 1. Name of decease employee 2. Number of dependents 3. Number of Schooj/College going children< 4. Number of marriageQbSe daughters 5. Whether died of serious ailment 6. Outslde loans 7. Sajary/Inwme pcrticulws s Latc Shri Bhaskcsr Noyak : 05 s Jhe dependents incjyde 04 school 9oin9 children. ;Nil :No s Ctaimed outside borroi^ing Rs. 10000/-, which has not been ^ub^tanticited beyond doubt. W©have i9nored the same. : Last drawn gross sdary Rs. 5719/- Lcxst dr<mn net saiary Rs. 3577/- Notlonaj monthly inc^me Assessed Rs. 2798/- 8. Avdtebility of DwelJing unlt ;No. 9. Remarks: Looking to the size of the family, 090 of the deceosed employee, number ond age of the dependents, non avaiJGbjjjty of dwelljng unit and the rx?tJonGJ montiiSy income of the fomsly; the condition of the family mcy be conssdered os penurious. Ouft detailed note js place alongside. 7. The identic^S scheme came-up for consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court jn the case of StQte Bank of India S Ors. ¥. Jcispcsf Kaw {JT 2007 (3) SC 35 }, the Hon'ble Supreme Court after having considered the scheme and source of income of the petitioner in that case heid in paragraph 27, as under:- is2Z Hence a major criterion while apposnting a person on compassionate grounds shouid be 1+ie financial condition of the famity Ihc. decea^d person left behind, Unless the finwicial condition is entirely penury, such appointments coinnot be made* In the present case the financial condition of the respondents family is not one of destitution, the Gppella^ts have already paid a sum of Rs. 4,57,607/- as terminal benefits (after deducting Rs. 19,183/" towards JiabiJities): a sum of Rs. 2055/- p.m. was being paid towards family pension cnd monthi8y income under Staff Mutual Welfare Scheme ond m addition the totai monthiy income of the famiiy comes to Rs. 5855/- (mon1+ily pension of fts. 2055/- + Rs. 3800/- p.m. as notionai interest on 1+ie investment of Rs. 4,57,607/"). The competent fact finding authority on the basis of the above financiat details had arrived at the conclusion that the finonciai$ condition of the famiSy is not penurious cnd that the fam||y ^arns sufficient income to maintain them^ives- Hence cppointment on compassionate ground wcis not grcnted to the re^pondent. We however, do not feel the necessit^ to jnterfere with 1+iis order of the Bank Authority on the fact situation of this oase." 8, In fne pres^nt co^e., the aufnorities based on the facts came to 1+ie concSusion that the fanfiiiy earns sufficient jncome to maintdn them^lves. Hence, I do not feei the necessit/ to interfere with fnis order of the Bouik Authority on the fact situation of this case. Thus, fne order dated 22-7-2005 (Annexure P-1) needs no interfercnce by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under ArticSe 226 of the Constitution of India. 9. A^ a result and for ihc reasons stated hereinabove, the writ petition is dismis^d. No order as to costs. Sd/- SatishK. Agnihotri Judge Subhssh