Court No. - 26 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 54592 of 2004 Petitioner :- Smt. Nanda Tambe Respondent :- Union Bank Of India And Others Petitioner Counsel :- Neeraj Kumar Srivastava,P.K. Mukherjee,Pranab Kumar Respondent Counsel :- Vivek Ratan Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
The contention raised in the writ petition is that the petitioneŕs claim has
been rejected on erroneous considerations. A counter-affidavit has been
filed and in paragraph nos.17 to 28, the respondent – Bank has justified
the impugned order on the ground that the petitioneŕs financial condition
was quite sound and since there was no immediate destitution,
thereforę the bank was not bound to extend the benefit of
compassionate appointment to the petitioner.
Thereafteŗ, the petitioner has filed a supplementary-affidavit stating
therein that 134 candidates have been offered compassionate
appointment and, as such, no distinction could have been drawn in the
case of the petitioner. The circumstances under which such
appointments had been given to 134 candidates is not available on
record.
Learned counsel for the bank may file an appropriate reply to the said
supplementary-affidavit explaining as to how the bank has exercised its
discretion in favour of those 134 candidates so as to avoid any
discrimination to the petitioner. It may be remembeŗed as a matter of
principle that discretion either on the administrative or judicial side, has
to be exercised judiciously as held in the case of Reliance Airport of
India and others Vs. Airports Authority of India and others, (2006) 10
SCC 1 (Para 26).
Let the Supplementary-Affidavit be filed within 4 weeks.
List thereafter.
Order Date :- 2.4.2010
Irshad