A claim by an employer that an application was rejected cannot be sustained in court unless the employer provides concrete proof of service or communication of the rejection order to the applicant.

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or direction or order, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the communication dt.15/04/2014 and 17/04/2014 of R2 and R3 respectively in rejecting claim of the petitioner for payment of ex-gratia lump-sum amount in lieu of compassionate appointment as illegal arbitrary and unjust and in violation of Article 14, 21 of Constitution of India and Bank policy as envisaged in the circular dt.04/08/2005 consequently to direct the respondents to pay ex-gratia in lump-sum to the petitioner duly considering the representations dt.24/02/2014, 04/04/2014 and 15/05/2014

IA NO: 1 OF 2015 (WPMP 46515 OF 2015

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the representations dt.24/02/2014, 04/04/2014 and 15/05/2014 of petitioner for payment of ex-gratia lump-sum amount in lieu of compassionate appointment

The Court made the following order:

ORDER:

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following main prayer:

“to issue an appropriate writ or direction or order, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the communication dt.15/04/2014 and 17/04/2014 of R2 and R3 respectively in rejecting claim of the petitioner for payment of ex-gratia lump-sum amount in lieu of compassionate appointment as illegal arbitrary and unjust and in violation of Article 14, 21 of Constitution of India and Bank policy as envisaged in the circular dt.04/08/2005 consequently to direct the respondents to pay ex-gratia in lump-sum to the petitioner duly considering the representations dt.24/02/2014, 04/04/2014 and 15/05/2014 and to pass…..”

Heard Sri T.V.Suman, learned counsel representing Sri M.Ravindra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ch.Venkata Challa Rao, learned counsel for Sri K.B.Ramanna Dora, learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the material on record.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner‟s husband joined in the 1st respondent bank and while he was working as a Senior Assistant in the 3rd respondent branch at Kovur, SPSR Nellore District, he died on 02.08.1999, while he was in service.

Thereafter, the petitioner who is widow of the deceased employee by stating the factual aspects and also her pathetic condition etc., preferred an application on 07.01.2000 to the respondent authorities to consider her case for compassionate appointment, i.e. within the period of one year from the date of death of the deceased employee.

Learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court Ex.P8 (letter dated 15.04.2014), where under the 2nd respondent bank authority addressed a letter to the petitioner, informing that the petitioner‟s application for compassionate appointment dated 07.01.2000 was rejected by the bank on 05.08.2002, on the ground that the financial position of late Sri B.Laxman Rao(petitioner‟s husband), as on the date of his death was considered as „non penurious‟ and also the scheme of payment of exgratia in lumpsum in the 1st respondent bank came into force with effect from 04.08.2005, as such petitioner is not eligible for the said scheme for exgratia also.

Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the alleged rejected letter dated 05.08.2002 by the respondent bank authorities is not served on the petitioner. As such, the petitioner is under the impression that her application is still pending consideration before the respondent bank authorities.

In that premise only, the petitioner preferred series of representations dated 24.02.2014, 04.04.2014 and 15.05.2014 to the concerned bank authorities stating her financial crisis a