Orissa High Court
Case Details
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 03-Oct-2024 17:51:26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.4260 of 2017 (In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950). Dipti Rekha Panda …. Petitioner(s) -versus- Sambalpur District Cooperative Central Bank, Head Office, Bargarh …. Opposite Party (s) Advocates appeared in the case throughHybrid Mode: For Petitioner(s) For Opposite Party (s) : :
Legal Reasoning
Mr.SarathiJyoti Mohanty, Adv. Mr.Amit Prasad Bose, Adv. Mr.Baidhar Sahoo, Adv. CORAM: DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI DATE OF HEARING:-01.08.2024 DATE OF JUDGMENT:-24.09.2024 Dr. S.K. Panigrahi, J. 1. In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner seeks to quash the letter dated 09.02.2017 and prays for consideration of her compassionate appointment under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme, either for herself or her mother. I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE: 2. The brief facts of the case as presented by the Petitioner: Page 1 of 7 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 03-Oct-2024 17:51:26 (i) The petitioner is the married daughter of Late Baisampayan Dash, who was employed as an Assistant Manager at the Sambalpur District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd. He passed away on 11.06.2016 while in service. (ii) The petitioner submitted an application on 07.02.2017 to the Secretary/CEO of Sambalpur DCC Bank, requesting compassionate appointment either for herself or her mother under the R.A. Scheme. (iii) In response, the CEO of the Bank issued a letter (No, 5156) dated 09.02.2017, rejecting the application on the following grounds: a. The petitioner is a married daughter, and thus, as per Rule 8, she is ineligible for appointment under the R.A. Scheme. b. The petitioner’s mother is employed as an Anganwadi worker, drawing a salary, and therefore does not qualify as a distressed family member. (iv) Aggrieved by such rejection, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking for quashing of the letter dated 09.02.2017 and praying for consideration of appointment under the Rehabilitation Assistance II. 3. (i) Scheme for either herself or her mother. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER: Learned counsel for the Petitioner earnestly made the following submissions in support of his contentions: The petitioner submitted that her marital status should not disqualify her from receiving a compassionate appointment. She relies on Page 2 of 7 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 03-Oct-2024 17:51:26 Seemarani Pandab v. State of Odisha1 case, which establishes that a married daughter can still be considered a dependent on her deceased parent. (ii) He further submitted that the widow of the deceased is not precluded from seeking employment as an Anganwadi worker, as the dependency of the family is more relevant than the mere fact of employment. (iii) The petitioner contended that the rejection of the opposite party bank, based on HR Policy provisions, is unlawful, discriminatory, and contrary to established legal precedents. (iv) He further contended that the Bank’s rigid application of its HR Policy, which disqualifies married daughters for compassionate appointment, is arbitrary and contrary to the welfare principles governing such schemes. III. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY: 4. (i) Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party earnestly made the following submissions in support of his contentions: It is submitted that the opposite party bank is a Central Co-operative Society, not a State or an instrumentality of the State, and thus not amenable to writ jurisdiction. The petitioner has an alternative remedy available under the OCS Act, 1962, before the Registrar Co-operative Societies, Odisha. (ii) It is further submitted that neither the petitioner (a married daughter) nor her mother (an employed Anganwadi Worker) are eligible for 1RVWPET No.416 of 2023. Page 3 of 7 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 03-Oct-2024 17:51:26 appointment under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme as per the Bank’s HR policy. The scheme provides for the appointment of a widow, son, or unmarried daughter, subject to necessity, qualification, and vacancy within the Bank. (iii) It is contended that the petitioner admitted in her Writ Petition that the engagement of her mother and the marital status of herself and her sisters, which disqualifies her from seeking appointment under the scheme. IV. COURT’S REASONING AND ANALYSIS: 5. 6. Heard learned counsel for both parties and carefully reviewed the materials placed before this Court. The central issue for consideration is whether the petitioner’s status as a married daughter should serve as a ground for denying her compassionate appointment. In the past, this Court had the opportunity to address a similar issue in the case of Seema Rani Pandab (supra)wherein it was held in para 10 as under: ”10. I must reiterate that the yardstick for extending the benefit of compassionate appointment should be dependency of the dependents on the deceased Government Servant and the marital status of dependent should not be an impediment for his/her consideration on compassionate ground to provide support to suffering family on account of loss of an earning member in the family. A daughter after her marriage doesn’t cease to be daughter of the father or mother and obliged to maintain their parents and daughter cannot be allowed to escape her responsibility on the ground that she is now married, therefore, such a policy of the State Government disqualifying, a ’married’ daughter and excluding her from Page 4 of 7 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 03-Oct-2024 17:51:26 consideration apart from being arbitrary and discriminating is a retrograde step of State Government as welfare State, on which stamp of approval cannot be made by this Court.” 7. Likewise, in the case of Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana2 the Supreme Court held that the primary objective of compassionate appointments is to alleviate the immediate financial hardship that befalls a family following the untimely demise of its breadwinner, ensuring that the family is not plunged into destitution or subjected to extreme financial deprivation. The Court has emphasized that such appointments are intended to address the urgency of the situation and provide relief in times of crisis. This principle has been reiterated in numerous judgments of the Supreme Court, firmly establishing that compassionate appointments do not constitute an alternative mode of recruitment nor can they be claimed as a matter of right. 8. The prevailing policy of the opposite party bank, which disqualifies a married daughter from seeking compassionate appointment, is manifestly arbitrary. Such exclusion, based solely on gender, contravenes the principles enshrined under Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India. A similarly situated male sibling, such as a married son, would still fall within the zone of consideration, as his marital status does not preclude him from eligibility. Therefore, the rejection of a married daughter at the threshold constitutes discriminatory treatment based on gender. 21994 SCC (4) 138. Page 5 of 7 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 03-Oct-2024 17:51:26 9. The exclusion of a married daughter from even being considered for compassionate appointment, regardless of her dependency status, is patently discriminatory. Such a policy fails to account for the possibility that the deceased employee may have been survived solely by daughters and a widow. The mere fact of marriage should not disqualify the daughters from being considered, as they may be in a position to support the surviving widow if employment is granted. Additionally, an undertaking can be obtained from the applicant upon favourable consideration to ensure compliance with the terms of compassionate appointment. 10. It is pertinent to note that the widow of the deceased is merely employed as an Anganwadi worker, and the remuneration she receives may not be sufficient to sustain the family. Given the current financial condition of the deceased’s family, it would be reasonable and just to classify them as a distressed family for the purposes of compassionate appointment. 11. It is well-established in law that procedural technicalities should never serve as an impediment to the delivery of substantial justice. Such technical barriers could have been rectified either by the opposite party bank acting suomotu or upon requisition by the petitioner. The outright denial of consideration for the petitioner’s claim under compassionate appointment has resulted in severe economic injustice. The opposite party bank, therefore, ought to have adopted a more holistic approach Page 6 of 7 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 03-Oct-2024 17:51:26 in dealing with the matter and arrived at a judicious policy decision in favour of the petitioner. 12. In the light of the issue of maintainability raised by the learned counsel for the Opposite Party, this Court is on the same page with him insofar as the non-maintainability of the present Writ. However, considering the distress condition of the Petitioner and the delay of seven years in the hearing of this present Writ Petition, further relegating the matter to the appropriate authority would further consume time. In light of the foregoing, this Writ Petition is hereby allowed. The Opposite Party bank is directed to reassess the Petitioner’s application, ensuring a more inclusive and equitable approach in its policy decisions, particularly with regard to compassionate appointments. The bank is further instructed to align its practices with the principles of fairness and non-discrimination, as mandated by law. 13. 14. 15. Interim order, if any, passed earlier stands vacated. (Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Judge Orissa High Court, Cuttack, Dated the 24th Sept., 2024/ Page 7 of 7