IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.803 of 2010 BIMAL BAITHA S/O LATE BINDESHWARI BAITHA R/O VILL- CHAND MOHAN BADA, P.S. KUNDURA CHAINPUR, DISTT. EAST CHAMPARAN AT MOTIHARI Versus 1. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA THROUGH ITS ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER MUZAFFARPUR 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER CIRCLE OFFICE, STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUZAFFARPUR 3. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER CIRCLE-2, STATE BANK OF INDIA, CIRCLE OFFICE, MUZAFFARPUR 4. THE BRANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF INDIA, BRANCH- DHAKA, DISTT. EAST CHAMPARAN AT MOTIHARI ----------- 03. 23.02.2010 Counsel for the State Bank of India(hereinafter referred to as the Bank) Smt. Nilu Agrawal prays for time but such prayer is refused as earlier under orders dated 8.2.2010 this Court allowed her time to file counter affidavit but the counsel has not chosen to file any counter affidavit and request is being made for further adjournment. I am not inclined to grant her further time to file counter affidavit. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Bank. 3. Petitioner is the son of Late Bindeshwari Baitha who served as Class-4 employee in the Dhaka branch of the Bank within the district of East Champaran. His father left for heavenly abode on 3.8.2001, whereafter application was filed to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground. In compliance of the instructions of the authorities of the Bank mother of the petitioner submitted affidavit, which is dated 17.1.2002 and is contained in Annexure-1 to this application. After receipt of affidavit query was made by the Assistant General Manager, Region-2 Muzaffarpur as is evident from letter dated 4.9.2004, Annexure-2 but the prayer of the petitioner was not considered, although several correspondence was - 2 - made in this connection, which is evident from Annexures-3,4,5,6,7 and 8. Under order dated 31.7.2007, Annexure-9 the authorities of the Bank rejected the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground observing that for the present there is no provision for granting compassionate appointment in the Bank. By filing the present writ application the instructions of the Bank refusing to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground has been impugned in the instant case. 4. Having heard counsel for the parties, I set aside the direction of the Bank not to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground as the very perusal of the instruction dated 31.7.2007, Annexure-9 indicates that for the present there is no scheme for appointment on compassionate ground, the case of the petitioner was required to have been considered in the light of the scheme which was in vogue in the Bank on the date of death of his father i.e. 3.8.2001. Accordingly, I direct the General Manager of the Bank to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground in accordance with law as early as possible, in any case within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 5. This writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N.Sinha, J.)