Gujarat High Court High Court

Appearance vs Unknown on 21 January, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Appearance vs Unknown on 21 January, 2010
Author: Bhagwati Prasad,&Nbsp;Honourable Bankim.N.Mehta,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

LPA/6/2010	 1/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 6 of 2010
 

In


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5521 of 2007
 

With


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 4 of 2010
 

In


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 6 of 2010
 

=========================================
 

JASUMATI
WD/O VALABHAI JADAV 

 

Versus
 

BANK
OF BARODA AND ANOTHER =========================================
 

Appearance
: 
MR BP GUPTA
for the
Appellant 
. 
=========================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 21/01/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD)

Admittedly,
the appellant’s family was getting more than Rs.6,000/- in 1998. The
object of the Scheme of 1998 for compassionate appointment is
delineated hereinbelow:

OBJECT:

The
object of the scheme is to offer compassionate appointment in case
where the Bank is satisfied that the financial condition of the
family is penurious and such that but for the provision of
employment, the family will not be able to meet the crisis.

In
view of the object of the Scheme, if the condition of the employee
was penurious, then only employment could be offered.

The
Bank had refused to offer appointment to the appellant on the ground
that she is receiving 60% of the emoluments of the deceased, that
means the financial condition of the appellant is not penurious. In
that view of the matter, if the learned Judge has not countenanced
the arguments raised by the appellant for getting compassionate
appointment, we do not think that any illegality has been committed
by the learned Single Judge, which warrants interference by this
Court.

In
view of the above, the appeal has no force and the same is dismissed.

In
view of the dismissal of the main appeal, no orders are passed on the
Civil Application and the same is disposed of.

(BHAGWATI
PRASAD, J.)

(BANKIM
N.MEHTA, J.)

omkar

   

Top