PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ORS. versus ASHWINI KUMAR TANEJA

Citation: [2004] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 597 · Decided: 16-08-2004 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Leave Granted & Allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
ASHWINI KUMAR TANEJA 
AUGUST 16, 2004 
[ARIJIT PASAYAT AND C.K. THAKKER, JJ.] 
B 
Service Law: 
Punjab National Bank Scheme for Employment of the Dependents of 
the Employee who dies while in the service of the Bank Service on C 
Compassionate Grounds: 
Compassionate appointment-Conditions to be fulfilled-Financial 
hardship-Deceased employee's heirs received retrial benefits-But the 
said employee's son denied compassionate appointment as there was no 
financial hardship to his family in view of the retrial benefits-Validity of- D 
Held: Appointment on compassionate ground is not a source of recruitment 
but merely an exception to making appointments on open invitation of 
application on benefits-The object is to enable the family to get over 
sudden financial crisis-The Scheme required amount received as retrial 
merits to be taken into account while determining the financial hardship- E 
Hence, retrial benefits received by the heirs of the deceased employee to 
be considered-Therefore, compassionate appointment rightly denied 
The respondent's father died while working as a class IV employee 
of the appellant-Bank. The respondent made an application for F 
employment on compassionate grounds. This application was rejected 
by the appellant on the ground that there was no financial hardship 
to the family of the deceased since the heirs of the family had received 
substantial amounts as retrial benefits. 
The High Court allowed the respondent's writ petition with the G 
direction to consider the case of the respondent for compassionate 
appointment: The High Court further held that the retrial benefits 
received by the heirs of the deceased employee could not be made a 
ground for rejecting the application for compassionate appointment. 
Hence the appeak, 
H 
597 
598 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2004] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: I. Appointment should be made strictly on the basis of 
open invitation of applications and merit. The appointment on 
compassionate ground is not another source of recruitment but merely 
B an exception to the aforesaid requirement taking into consideration the 
fact of the death of the employee while in service leaving his family 
without any means of livelihood. The object is to enable the family to 
get over sudden financial crisis. [600-B-C) 
Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana, (1994] 4 SCC 138, relied 
C on. 
State of Haryana v. Rani Devi, JT (1996] 6 SCC G46; Life Insurance 
Corporation of India v. Asha Ramchhandra Ambekar, (1994) 2 SCC 718; 
Smt. Sushma Gosain v. Union of India, [1989) 4 SCC 468; Phoolwati v. 
D Union of India, [1991] Supp. 2 SCC 689; Union of India & Ors. v. 
Bhagwan Singh, (1995) 6 SCC 476; Director of Education (Secondary) 
v. Pushpendra Kumar, [1998) 5 SCC 192; State of U.P. v. Paras Nath, 
[1998] 2 SCC 412; State of Manipur v. Md. Rajodin, [2003] 7 SCC Sll; 
State of Haryana v. Ankur Gupta, [2003] 7 SCC 704; Haryana State 
Electricity Board v. Naresh Tanwar, [1996[ 8 SCC 23 and Haryana State 
E Electricity Board v. Hakim Singh, (1997] 8 sec 85, referred to. 
2. The High Court has taken the view that the retrial benefits are 
not to be taken into consideration while dealing with a prayer for 
compassionate appointment. This view is contrary to what has been 
F held in Kunti Tiwary 's case. In the instant case, there was a Scheme 
called 'Punjab National Bank Scheme for Employment of the 
Dependents of the Employee who dies while in the service of the Bank 
Service on Compassionate Grounds' is operating in the appellant-
Bank. The said Scheme provides for consideration of compassionate 
G appointment in case the family is without sufficient means of livelihood 
specifically keeping in view the following viz; family pension, gratuity, 
provident fund, etc. Therefore, the view taken by the High Court 
cannot be sustained. (602-D-H; 603-A-B; 603-E-F) 
The General Manager (D & P.B.) v. Kunti Tiwari, [2004] 7 SCC 271, 
H relied on. 
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK v. A.K TANEJA [PASAYAT, J.] 
599 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 5256 of A 
2004. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 16.10.2003 of the Rajasthan 
High Court in D.B.C.S. A. No. 639 of 2003. 
Mukul Rohtagi, Dhruv Mehta, Ms. Shalini Gupta and Mohit Choudhary B 
for Mis. K.L. Mehta and Co. for the Appellants. 
K.S. Bhati for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
c 
ARIJIT P ASA YAT, J.: Leave granted. 
Punjab National
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.