IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4431 of 2009 MANTU KHARWAR Versus THE BANK OF BARODA & ORS ----------- 2. 09.04.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Father of the petitioner died in harness on 8.10.2001. In accordance with the policy for compassionate appointment as existing on that day, framed in 1998, the petitioner applied within time on 30.1.2002. The Bank appears to have kept the matter pending and is now relying on a subsequent policy decision to urge that while other additional benefits may be available under the new policy, the claim for compassionate appointment cannot be entertained as communicated by order dated 11.3.2008. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon a Bench decision of this Court in CWJC No. 8123 of 2006. This Court while considering a claim for compassionate appointment on a cause of action arising on 2.10.1999, under the policy of 1998, rejected the defence of the Bank that a subsequent change in the policy could be a ground to deny the compassionate appointment. Directions were issued to consider the claim for compassionate appointment under the policy existing as on the date that the cause of action accrued. No one appears on behalf of the Bank, despite the fact that a copy of the writ application has been served on the counsel representing the Bank and his name appears in the cause 2 list. This Court otherwise may have adjourned the matter to enable the Bank to have its say but when the matter is covered by a decision of this Court rendered on contest with regard to the same present respondent Bank, the Respondents being a ‘State’ within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution are expected to act more reasonably and responsibly rather than trashing litigation upon this Court on a matter which has already been decided earlier. For the reasons discussed in CWJC No. 8123 of 2006, the impugned orders declining to consider the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment are set aside. The Respondent-Bank is directed to take a final decision on the claim of compassionate appointment in light of the order of this Court on a similar issue of law in CWJC No. 8123 of 2006, decided against the same respondent-Bank. Let such consideration be done and final decision be taken within a maximum period of two months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. In case of an adverse decision, if the option be available to the Bank, the respondent shall be required to pass a reasoned and speaking order, in light of the earlier decision of this Court. The writ application stands allowed. AKS/ (Navin Sinha, J.)