JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Anubhav Sinha, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Amaresh Sinha, learned counsel for the respondent-appellant and Sri Vijay Prakash Jaiswal, learned counsel for the petitioner-respondent.

2. The present intra-court appeal has been filed against the order of the learned single-judge dated 22.2.2019 passed in Priyanka Agarwal vs. Union of India and Others (Writ-A No. 51712 of 2017). By that order, the learned single-judge has allowed the writ petition and directed the appellant-respondent to consider the claim of the respondent-petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment, ignoring the cut-off date i.e. 1.11.2014 arising under the Scheme for Compassionate Appointment in Public Sector and General Insurance Companies, introduced vide communication dated 7th August, 2014, issued by the Director, Department of Financial Services, Ministry of Finance, Government of India.

3. The petitioner’s husband Sri Surendra Kumar Agarwal died-in-harness on 6.9.2014, while working on the post of Assistant, with the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Moradabad. Undisputedly, on the date of occurrence of his death, there did not exist a scheme for grant of compassionate appointment, to his family members. In fact, there existed and was enforced a scheme for grant of Ex-gratia payment, to the family of the deceased-employees of the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

4. Later, on 7.8.2014, vide communication issued by the Director, Department of Financial Services, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, the Scheme for Grant of Compassionate Appointment, was published. For ready reference, Clause 8 of the Scheme for Grant of Compassionate Appointment, reads as below:

“8. The scheme comes into force prospectively from 01st November 2014. Application for employment under the Scheme from eligible dependent should normally be considered up to five years from the date of death or retirement on medical grounds taking place on or after 01st November, 2014 and decision to be taken on merit in each case.”

5. On 12.12.2014, the present petitioner-respondent filed her application for grant of compassionate appointment. It was rejected by communication dated 5.3.2015 for the reason that the death had occurred prior to the cut-off date. Here, it may also be noted, much earlier there existed a scheme for grant of compassionate appointment. However, it was discontinued with effect from 1.6.2002 and replaced with the scheme providing for Ex-gratia payment.

6. In the writ petition, the only prayer made reads as below:

“(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent nos. 1 and 2 to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground as soon as possible and in this regard efforts may be done by the respondents.

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to decide the representations of the petitioner pending before him.

(c) Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstance of the case.”

7. While allowing the writ petition, the learned Single Judge has observed as below:

“I have considered the submissions of the parties.

An employee or the dependent cannot decide his/her date of death. It is not in the hands of dependent of an employee or the employee himself/herself when he/she would die. Even before 1.11.2014 there was old scheme of 2002 and there is no dispute that under the old scheme, the petitioner was entitled for being given compassionate appointment. The petitioner's claim for appointment on compassionate ground is being denied on the ground of new scheme in which an artificial date of death of an employee i.e. 1.11.2014 is fixed, which has no basis. Even otherwise, the petitioner was entitled for consideration of appointment on compassionate ground under the old scheme when the death of the husband of the petitioner was occurred on 6.9.2014.

Considering the fact that the date of death of an employee has been