- (1.)HON'ble Devi Prasad Singh, J.- Petitioner's father Late Sri Chandrapal Pandey was a Cashier in Allahabad Bank Amethi Branch, Sultanpur. He died in harness on 9th December, 1998,-After his death, petitioner, applied for appointment on compassionate ground. By impugned order dated 15th October, 2001 contained in Annexure-8, petitioner's candidature has been rejected by Chief Manager, Allahabad Bank on the ground that Late Chanderpal was punished on account of misconduct by stoppage of two increments permanently. Thus, on account of the fact that he was punished for misconduct during the course of employment, respondents have declined to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground.
(2.)PETITIONER's Counsel submits that the order of punishment was passed on 23rd March, 1991 and Late Chandrapal Pandey died almost after seven years, during the course of service. PETITIONER's Counsel has invited attention to clause (b) of the scheme of appointment on compassionate ground filed as Annexure-2 to the counter-affidavit by the respondents, which is reproduced as under: "in case where disciplinary proceedings were pending or were being contemplated at the time of death of the employee or the employee was proceeded against death the appointment of the dependents of such employees (as defined in the scheme in the bank's service shall only be considered after prior approval of the Ministry of Finance indicating details of the case (s ). "
Submission of the petitioner's Counsel is that merely because Late Sri Chandrapal Pandey was punished by stoppage of two increments, petitioner can not be denied the appointment on compassionate ground. There is no bar to grant appointment to the dependent of deceased employee who has been punished for any misconduct during the course of employment. Petitioner's Counsel has placed reliance on a case reported in 2005 (5) ALJ 308, Vijay Singh v. Rani Laxmi Bai Kshetriya Grameen Bank, Jhansi, wherein Hon'ble Judge of this Court has held that stoppage of two increments for two years to deceased employee cannot be held. to be a disqualification or impediment for appointment on compassionate ground. Submission of petitioner's Counsel Sri Rudra Mani Shukia seems to have force. Case referred to hereinabove indicates that only rider contained in the scheme of the Bank is that in case at the time of death disciplinary proceeding is pending or was contemplated, then the case of dependents of such employee shall be sent for approval to the Ministry of Finance. In the facts and circum stances of the case, present controversy does not seem to be covered by rider placed by the scheme for compassionate appointment, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure-2 to the counter- affidavit.

In the present case, Late Sri Chanderpal Pandey's death took place during the course of employment in the year 1998. The scheme of compassionate appointment a copy of which has been filed by the respondents does not postulate that in case an employee has been punished for any misconduct during the course of employment his or her dependent cannot be given appointment. My attention has been invited to no such rider contained in the scheme.

(3.)IN view of the above, impugned order dated 15th October, 2001 seems to have been passed on unfounded grounds. The acceptance or rejection of the claim of a person for appointment on compassionate ground should have been done strictly by adhering to the scheme for compassionate appointment. Respondents were not right in travelling beyond the scheme while declining for appointment on compassionate ground. It is settled proposition of law that in case the authorities want to do something, then that should be done in accordance with the Rules or Regulations and not otherwise.
In view of the above, impugned order is not sustainable in law and is liable to be set aside. The writ petition deserves to be allowed.