Pranab Kumar Lala v. Union of India & Ors.

the said application. The learned counsel for the bank further submits that the ex gratia relief is not a right. He has relied upon Clause 10 of the scheme of 2008 and submits that as per the said scheme it is the sole discretion of the bank for looking into the financial conditions of the family and in deserving and eligible cases only either the bank can grant ex gratia payment or compassionate appointment.

#6. Considered the submission made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the materials on record. This Court finds that the mother was not strict on her stand. At first she has requested for grant of ex gratia payment and subsequently she has prayed for compassion appointment of her son on account of death of her husband. The bank has given the liberty to the mother in the year 2009 itself to clear her stand whether she is intending for ex gratia payment or the compassionate appointment of her son, the mother has not given any reply for 9 years. All of a sudden after 9 years in the year 2018 she again prayed for ex gratia payment. Even after filing of the said 5 application for grant of ex gratia payment, the mother has not taken any further steps against the bank. In the mean time the Allahabad Bank has merged with the Indian Bank and the scheme of Indian Bank has come into force and as per the scheme of the Indian Bank, the compassionate appointment is eligible for the dependents of the deceased employee who have died on or after 5th August, 2014. In the present case the father of the petitioner died in the November, 2008 and at that point of time scheme of Allahabad Bank of 2008 was in force. Thus the reason in the impugned order is not corrected.

#7. Considering the above, this Court finds that during the lifetime the mother had the opportunity to proceed with the request either for grant of ex gratia payment or the compassionate appointment but the mother has not processed the same, only after 9 years she has made an application even she has not taken any steps for grant of ex gratia payment.

#8. After the death of mother, the petitioner has made an application in the year 2022 for appointment on compassionate appointment which is totally barred by limitation. Considering the above, this Court did not find any merit in the writ application.

#9. Accordingly, WPA 19948 of 2024 is dismissed.

#10. There will be, however, no order as to costs. 6

#11. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

#12. Urgent Photostat certified copy, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with all formalities. (Krishna Rao, J.)