IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1763 of 2000 Smt.Shiva Pandey, wife of late Ashok Kumar Pandey, Development Officer in Chapra Branch Office of United India Insurance Company Ltd., Chapra at present, resident of C/o Bharat Mishra, House No. 24/A, Road No. 1, New Patliputra Colony, P.S. Patliputra, District- Patna ……………... Petitioner Versus 1. United India Insurance Company Limited through its General Manager, 24 Whites Road, Madras, PIN Code – 600 014 2. Regional Manager, United India Insurance Company Ltd., Chanakya Commercial Complex, 3rd. Floor, R. Block, Patna – 800001 3. Deputy Manager, United India Insurance Company Ltd., Chanakya Commercial Complex, 3rd. Floor, R. Block, Patna – 800001 4. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Ltd., Suraksha Bhawan, Akhara Ghat Road, Muzaffarpur 5. Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Ltd., Chapra Branch, Chapra 6. General Insurance Corporation of India, Insurance Building, Charch Gate, Andhery, Bombay (Mumbai) ……………….. Respondents. ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Jyoti Shankar, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Ashok Priyadarshi, Advocate. ----------- 9. 15.3.2011 The petitioner seeks a direction upon the authorities of the respondent-United India Insurance Company Limited to appoint her on compassionate ground. The petitioner is widow of an ex-employee of the Insurance Company who died in harness on 6.3.1993. The petitioner is the only legal heir. It is 2 stated that a prayer was made for appointment on compassionate ground before the authorities on 31.3.1993 itself which was renewed from time to time by different reminders. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is evident from Annexure-B to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent-Bank that there is provision for appointment on compassionate ground in the respondent-Company and thus the action of the respondent-authorities in not appointing the petitioner is unjustified. Learned counsel for the respondent- Insurance Company, on the other hand, submits that the provisions made in this regard are very clear that there is no obligation on the part of the Company to offer employment to the dependents of employees who die while in service and thus there would be no question of effecting any special recruitment to offer employment to the said category of persons, namely, widows, sons/unmarried daughters of employees who die while in service. It is submitted that under the said Rules only when any recruitment against sanctioned vacancies is 3 being effected, then concessions may be granted to the said category of persons for recruiting them as Assistant, Record Clerk or subordinate staff depending upon the educational qualifications with the further proviso that the persons concerned must have completed the age of 18 years and not be above 45 years of age. It is also urged by learned counsel for the Insurance Company that the petitioner being the sole dependent and widow of the deceased employee, is being paid a substantial amount as family pension and thus there is no occasion to consider her case for compassionate appointment. It is further contended by learned counsel that the clear stand of the respondent Insurance Company is that there are no vacancies for which any recruitment can be made and as a matter of fact, scheme of voluntary retirement has been put in place by the Company for reducing the strength of the employees. Lastly, it is urged by learned counsel that the purpose of appointment on compassionate ground is to grant immediate relief to the dependents of a 4 deceased employee to tide over the financial crisis that may have been caused to the family and there can be no justification for giving such employment if the family has been able to tide over the difficulties. In the present case the employee having died in the year 1993, no occasion for appointing the petitioner on compassionate ground can arise after a period of 18 years. I have considered the submissions of learned counsels for the parties. From the rules brought on the record it is evident that the Insurance Company has not adopted a regular scheme for compassionate appointment of dependents of deceased employees who die in harness. There is no system in the Company for making continuous appointments on compassionate ground as and when the applications for such purpose are made. The rules clearly provide that only when any recruitment against the sanctioned post is being effected then compassionate appointment may be made of the dependents of deceased employees who otherwise fulfill the conditions and qualifications laid down therein. The factual stand is that there is no 5 vacancy for recruitment and no such recruitment is going on in the Company rather the attempt is being made to reduce the surplus staff and streamline the Company by encouraging voluntary retirement of person by giving them golden hand shake. This Court is also of the view that the deceased employee having died in the year 1993, the whole purpose of granting compassionate appointment has ceased to exist after the passage of nearly 18 years. Even on the date when the writ petition was filed almost seven years had elapsed since the death of the employee. In the above circumstances, there is no occasion to grant any relief to the petitioner in the present writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. S.Pandey ( Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.)