Timeliness of applications under compassionate appointment schemes is crucial; late submissions may lead to dismissal.

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 17-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for a direction to the respondents to make payment of ex gratia lump sum amount in lieu of appointment on compassionate ground to the petitioner.

3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that the husband of the petitioner who was employed with the Central Bank of India, Station Road Branch at Gaya died in harness on 11.6.2007. The petitioner not being aware with the provisions of payment of ex gratia lump sum amount in lieu of appointment on compassionate ground, approached the respondents to appoint her on compassionate ground. No steps was taken by the respondent authorities. The petitioner received a communication dated 14.7.2010 from the Regional Manager of the Bank enclosing with the letter a copy of the scheme for payment of ex gratia lump sum amount in lieu of appointment on compassionate ground.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that soon after receipt of a copy of the scheme, the petitioner on 2.8.2010 applied for payment of ex gratia lump sum amount in lieu of compassionate appointment. As directed by the Bank by their letter dated 27.1.2011 (Annexure-3), the petitioner also provided the relevant documents. She was communicated on 8.1.2015 that the death of the petitioner’s husband having taken place on 11.6.2007 i.e. after 14.12.2005, his application was being resubmitted. However, on 21.11.2016, the respondent Branch Manager of the Bank informed the petitioner that even the application for ex gratia payment having been submitted beyond the period of six months from the date of death of the employee, the same had been returned. It is under these circumstances that the instant application has been filed directing the respondent Bank to make payment of the ex gratia lump sum amount in lieu of appointment on compassionate ground.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment dated 25.9.2025 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition no. 5109 of 2019 ( Smt. Sunita Namdev vs. UCO Bank and Ors. ) and more particularly paragraph no. 16 thereof.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the Bank submits that the facts not in dispute are that the husband of the petitioner died on 11.6.2007. The case of the petitioner is governed by the scheme for payment of ex gratia lump sum amount in lieu of appointment on compassionate ground, relevant circular of which has been brought on record by the petitioner as Annexure-2 to the application. Perusal of the same would show that the said new scheme came into operation with effect from 14.12.2005, however, an application had to be made by the family of the deceased employee within a period of six months from the date of death. The death of the husband of the petitioner/employee having taken place on 11.6.2007, the application should have been made on or before 11.12.2007. As against this, the application having been filed by the petitioner on 2.8.2010, the application could not be entertained nor any benefit be granted to the petitioner under the scheme. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the Bank relies on the judgment in the case of Shreejith L. vs. Deputy Director (Education) Kerala and Ors.; (2012) 7 SCC 248

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

8. The relevant facts in brief are that the employee/husband of the petitioner who was in service of the Central Bank having died on 11.6.2007, the petitioner came to apply for ex gratia payment under the scheme of the Bank on 2.8.2010. The Bank having considered the application of the petitioner, by letter dated 21.11.2016 written by the Branch Manager of the Bank addressed to the petitioner, communicated that the application having been submitted beyond the period of six months from the date of death of the employee, the same has been returned.

9. It further