( 1 ) RULE. Ms PJ Davawala, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Union of India and Mr Prashant G Desai, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 to 4 waive service of Rule.

( 2 ) PETITIONER No. 1 is the widow and petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are minor children (aged 9 and 2 years respectively) of late Shri Suresh M Bhandari. The deceased was a Chartered Accountant practising at Surat. The deceased had also filed the income-tax return for the year ended on 31. 3. 2000 (AY 2000-01) wherein his income from profession was shown as Rs. 2,21,610. 00. 2. 2 on 4. 4. 2001, the deceased had gone to Dena Bank, Surat for a banking transaction but he was shot dead by Mr Nagjibhai Kanjibhai Parmar, an employee of Dena Bank working as a security guard, which was a rash and reckless act in course of his employment. The deceased died on the spot on account of the fire arm wound on the chest of the deceased. 2. 3 it appears that on account of the tragic incident, the bank on humanitarian grounds was inclined to offer employment to petitioner No. 1-widow of the deceased by offering her a job at Jodhpur where the petitioners are now residing after the tragic incident. However, when the bank sought instructions of the Central Government, the Central Government declined to grant the permission. 2. 4 the petitioners have, therefore, filed the present petition for a writ to direct the respondent-bank and the Union of India to pay the petitioners a sum of Rupees One crore alongwith interest at 12% per annum from the date of death of the husband of petitioner No. 1 till realization. The petitioners have also prayed for a direction to the respondents to appoint petitioner No. 1 on a suitable post in the respondent-bank at its Jodhpur Branch commensurate with her qualifications. Pending final disposal of the petition, the petitioners have also prayed for interim compensation and also appointment on a suitable post with the respondent-bank with salary commensurate with the qualifications of petitioner No. 1.

( 3 ) ). AT the hearing of this petition, Mr Paritosh Calla, learned counsel for the petitioners has invited the attention of the Court to the manner in which the alleged incident took place. He has read out the material on record including the FIR dated 4. 4. 2001 (page 17) as well as the statement dated 4. 4. 2001 of Mahendrabhai Harilal Kothawala, aged 50 years, who was a rickshaw driver and was an eye witness to the incident. 3. 2 it is submitted that by an unlawful tortious act of the security guard who was acting in the course of his employment with the respondent-Bank, the petitioners have lost their sole bread winner and, therefore, the petitioners are entitled to get the writ of this Court for directing the respondents to appoint petitioner No. 1 as an employee of the respondent-bank at its Jodhpur branch where the petitioners are residing. It is further submitted that in a large number of matters now the Honble Courts have been directing the authorities to pay compensation in case of death of the concerned person. 3. 3 it is submitted that the deceased was practising Chartered Accountant who was aged 34 years and earning substantial income. As per his income-tax return for the year ended on 31. 3. 2000, his professional income was Rs. 2,21,610. 00. Hence, considering the well settled legal principles, the petitioners would be entitled to be awarded substantial amounts. The petitioners, have, therefore, prayed for a sum of Rs. 1 Crore as damages. In any view of the matter, the interim compensation is required to be awarded to the petitioners so that they do not have to suffer any misery till they get the final compensation amount. 3. 4 on behalf of the petitioners, strong reliance is has been placed on the decision of this Court in State of Gujarat vs. Dharmistaben N Rana, 2001 (3) GLR 2056 and on the decisions of the Apex Court in 1995 (5) SCC 659, 2001 (8) SCC 151, AIR 2000 SC 988, AIR 1989 SC 1607 and 1983 (4) SCC 141 in supp