The conflicting views on the applicability of the Scheme for Appointment on Compassionate ground/Payment of Ex-gratia and the need for a definitive interpretation of Clauses 8.1 and 8.2 of the Scheme.

JUDGMENT :

1. The present batch of special appeals is against orders of different dates passed by learned Single Judges directing the appellant-Banks to consider the application of the contesting respondents for appointment under the Dying-in-Harness Scheme dated 10.5.2019.

2. All the appeals involve interpretation of certain Clauses of the Scheme so as to find out whether applications filed for compassionate appointment by dependents of a deceased employee of the Bank within a times-pan of five years prior to the date of enforcement of the Scheme, would be covered under the Scheme or not. Consequently, all the appeals were heard together. However, for sake of convenience, the facts in Special Appeal (Defective) No. 468 of 2023 (Regular Number 541 of 2023) are being taken note of in the instant order. These are as follows:

(i) The husband of the respondent died on 19.1.2018 while in harness. At the relevant time, there was no scheme for appointment on compassionate grounds. The Scheme came into force on 1.3.2019.

(ii) The Bank vide a Communication dated 7.12.2021 informed the respondent that it would not be possible to consider her request for compassionate appointment as her husband had died before the commencement of the Scheme on 1.3.2019.

(iii) The respondent challenged the said order in the writ petition which has been allowed by the order impugned herein.

(iv) Learned Single Judge has taken the view that under Clause 8 of the Scheme, application for compassionate appointment could be filed within five years of death of an employee and therefore even if death had taken place before commencement of the Scheme, but application was filed within five years from the date of death, it would be covered under the Scheme.

3. Before we proceed further, it would be useful to note the relevant Clauses of the Scheme. The Scheme is known as “Scheme for Appointment on Compassionate ground/Payment of Ex-gratia.” The Government of India letter dated 31.12.2018 stipulated that “the Scheme shall be effective from the date on which the Board of RRB adopts the same.” Accordingly, NABARD advised the individual banks to adopt the same. Board of different RRB's adopted the scheme on different dates. In case of the appellant bank, it became effective from 01.03.2019.

4. Under Clause 1, the persons covered under the Scheme are mentioned, which is as follows:

“1. Coverage:

1.1 To a dependent family member of permanent employee of the Bank who:

(a) Dies while in service (including death by suicide).

(b) Is retired on medical grounds due to incapacitation before reaching the age of 55 years.

(Incapacitation is to be certified by a duly appointed Medical Board in a Government Medical College/Government District Head Quarters Hospitals/Panel of Doctors nominated by the Bank for the purpose).

1.2. For the purpose of Scheme “employee” would mean and include only a confirmed regular employee who was serving full time or part time on scale wages, at the time of death OR retirement on medical grounds, before reaching age of 55 years and does not include any one engaged on contract/temporary/casual or any person who is paid on commission basis.”

5. Clause 8 of the Scheme stipulates the time limit for considering the applications and it runs as follows:

“8. Time Limit for Considering Applications:

8.1 Application for employment under the Scheme from eligible dependent should normally be considered upto five years from the date of death or retirement on medical grounds and decision to be taken on merit in each case.

8.2 However, Bank can consider request for compassionate appointment even when the death or retirement on medical grounds of the employee took place long back, even five years ago. While considering such belated request, it should, however, be kept in view that the concept of compassionate appointment is largely related to the need for immediate assistance to the family of the employee in order to relieve it from economic distress. The very fact that the family has