IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10355 of 2008 AMRENDRA KUMAR, S/O LATE BHARAT MANDAL VILLAGE AND POST BABHABAN GANBA DISTRICT BANKA. .............PETITIONER. Versus 1.BIHAR KSHETRIAY BIHAR BIHAR GRAMIN BANK, BHAGAT SINGH CHOUK, MUNGER THROUGH CHAIRMAN. 2.CHAIRMAN BIHAR BIHAR KSHETRIAY BIHAR BIHAR GRAMIN BANK, BHAGAT SINGH CHOUK,MUNGER. 3.GENERAL MANAGER BIHAR KSHETRIAY BIHAR BIHAR GRAMIN BANK, BHAGAT SINGH CHOUK, MUNGER. 4.THE BRANCH MANAGER, BIHAR GRAMIN BANK, BHAGAT SINGH CHOUK, MUNGER. ...............RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02/ 03.05.2011 Having heard counsel for the parties and taking into account the decision of the bank to abolish the scheme of compassionate appointment by way of being substituted by a new policy of making payment of some ex gratia amount in lieu of compassionate appointment has been considered by the Apex Court in the case of State Bank of India and Anr vs Raj Kumar 2010(2) BBCJ SC 353, this court will have little option but to hold that the impugned order dated 25.03.2008 rejecting the claim of appointment of the petitioner does not suffer from any infirmity, inasmuch as, the case of the petitioner also was pending for appointment on compassionate ground on the day the new policy came into force. 2 The submission of Mr. Shivajee Pandey, learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the letter dated 23.05.2005 (Annexure-3) would go to show that so far as Bhagalpur Banka Kshetriya Gramin Bank is concerned, it has already taken a decision regarding the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground and only a formal decision was awaited from the subsidiary lead bank namely UCO Bank and therefore the judgment in the case of State Bank of India and Anr vs Raj Kumar 2010(2) BBCJ SC 353 would not be applicable in the case of the petitioner and cannot be accepted. From the wording of the aforesaid letter dated 23.05.2005(Annexure-3), it would be clear that the Board of Directors in the meeting held on 13.11.2003, had approved and adopted the policy for appointment on compassionate ground and thereafter the individual case of the petitioner was taken up in the next meeting of the Board held on 21.04.2005, but the Board of Directors did not choose to take any firm decision except that an administrative clearance as with regard to the appointment of the petitioner on 3 compassionate ground in the bank was sought to be obtained from the lead bank, i.e. UCO Bank. As a matter of fact, from the wordings of the aforesaid letter dated 23.05.2005, it becomes absolutely clear that the case of the petitioner was still pending on the date on which the circular abolishing the scheme of compassionate appointment came into force and therefore, the consequential order dated 25.03.2008, as contained in Annexure-1 will have the sanction in law as decided in the case of State Bank of India(supra). That being so, this application is devoid of any merit and is accordingly dismissed. Nothing said in this order shall however come in the way of the petitioner to claim ex-gratia amount in lieu of compassionate appointment as per the prevailing policy. It is also clarified that such claim for payment of ex-gratia amount shall not be rejected on the ground that the petitioner had not filed the application within the prescribed period, inasmuch as, the petitioner was awaiting the result of this case. It is also directed that the bank 4 will take a final decision as with regard to payment of such ex-gratia amount expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observations and direction, this application is accordingly dismissed. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J)