Ratios:
a. ’Laches’ has various shades of meaning.
b. When an employer asked the petitioner to revive the claim after an event, the subsequent revival of the claim does not suffer from laches.

The petitioner seeks to challenge the order of the second respondent dated 19. 2000 passed in No.GAD (Che)/4153/ 07.01.057/2000-01 and while praying for setting aside the said order, also seeks for a direction to the respondents to consider and appoint the petitioners son in Class IV Service of the respondents Bank by applying the old scheme applicable to compassionate appointments.

2. The brief facts, which are required to be stated are that the petitioners husband was appointed in the bank on 2. 1971 and he died in harness on 20.06.1991, leaving behind the petitioner, one minor son and two minor daughters. One of the daughters is stated to be a physically handicapped child. At the time of the death of her husband, the petitioner was left with a small piece of vacant land at Guduvanchery, which did not yield any income. Apart from the terminal benefits, which she received due to the demise of her late husband, the family pension that is being paid is hardly stated to be around Rs.2000/-and odd. At that point of time, the petitioner applied for an employment for her son, who was 15 years old, as per the scheme for compassionate appointment that was in vogue. The application was stated to have been made on 04.09.1991. Since her son was a minor, the respondent Bank vide its reply dated 07.09.1991, advised her to renew her request after her son becomes major.

.3. The petitioner applied again on 15.04.1994. The respondent Bank sent a Proforma along with their letter dated 28.04.1994 and called for more particulars. The petitioner filled in the Proforma and sent it back on 30.05.1994, wherein the details about the cause of death of her husband, the terminal benefits, which were disbursed to her, pursuant to his demise, the property left behind as well as the liabilities that were to be met on that date and the family details. The family details furnished disclose that none were employed even at that point of time and that her son, who sought for employment, was 19 years old, had just then successfully completed his S.S.L.C. The said part of the proforma in Serial Nos.16 to 22 were relating to the ward for whom the application for compassionate appointment is made. Apart from the above details, the son also sent a communication dated 30.05.1994, making it clear that if he is given appointment as Class IV employee on compassionate ground, he will look after his sisters studies and their marriages and the welfare of his grand mother.

4. By a reply dated 20.06.1995, that is after more than a year, the respondents informed the petitioner that the facility of compassionate appointment was restricted to the spouse of the deceased and therefore, they were not in a position to offer appointment to her son and that the bank is prepared to offer a lumpsum ex gratia of Rs.75,740/-to the affected family. The willingness of the petitioner to accept the offer was also sought for. Immediately the petitioner sent her reply dated 20.07.1995 contending that the claim for compassionate appointment should be considered as per the Rules as on the death of her husband namely, 20.06.1991 and on that basis the petitioners son was entitled for an appointment in the services of the bank. However, by reply dated 16.04.1997, the respondent bank once again rejected the claim of the petitioner and came forward to offer the lumpsum ex gratia of Rs.75,740/- as advised in the letter dated 20.06.1995.

.5. Be that as it may under similar circumstances, the claim for compassionate appointment in respect of another employee who died in harness came to be made by the son of the deceased which was also rejected by the respondent bank. In respect of the said claim, a writ petition came to be filed in this Court in W.P.No.8284 of 1995. The claim in that case was also identical to that of the present petitioner. By order dated 28.09.1999, the said writ petition was allowed and a direction was issued to the respondents to consider the claim of the said writ p