Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11436 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1844 of 2025 Petitioner :- Savitri Devi Respondent :- General Manager Human Resource Management Deptt. Baroda Corporate Center Mumbai And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dr.Surya Prakash Mishra,Anand Prakash Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- Prashant Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Prashant Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of all the respondents. Instant petition has been filed praying for grant of compassionate appointment to the son of the petitioner. The husband of the petitioner namely Sri Vikram Bahadur Singh was an employee of the respondent-Bank. He died in harness on 22.12.2009. Admittedly, the petitioner has received the ex-gratia amount in terms of the scheme on 22.09.2010. Having set silent for almost 15 years, instant writ petition has now been filed claiming compassionate appointment. Apart from the fact that there are laches in filing the instant writ petition after having taken the ex-gratia amount and the petition having been filed after a period of almost 15 years from the death of the employee concerned, another aspect of the matter is that Sri Prashant Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondents-Bank states that at the time of the death of the petitioner's husband, the scheme dated 12.11.2007 was prevailing pertaining to grant of compassionate appointment or ex-gratia amount and that in terms of the scheme, the ex-gratia financial relief would be payable to those employees who died in harness while the scheme for compassionate appointment would only be admissible to those employees who died while performing official duty as a result of violence, terrorism, robbery or dacoity or the employee having died within five years of his first appointment or before reaching the age of 30 years whichever is later. It is contended by the respondents that so far as the compassionate appointment is concerned, it has not been indicated as to when the husband of the petitioner had been appointed and consequently, the ex-gratia financial as were admissible to the petitioner in terms of the scheme dated 12.11.2007 having already been given, which has been accepted without any demur or protest consequently, the petitioner would not be entitled for compassionate appointment. From a perusal of records it emerges that after the petitioner's husband died on 22.12.2009, admittedly, the family of the petitioner received the ex-gratia amount on 22.09.2010. Now, the petitioner stakes claim of her son for being appointed on compassionate grounds. The scheme which was prevailing at the time of death of husband of the petitioner was a scheme dated 12.11.2007 which only provided for grant of an ex-gratia financial relief to an employee who died in harness and compassionate appointment was admissible to dependents of those employees who died which performing official duty as a result of violence, terrorism, robbery or dacoity. It is not the case of the petitioner that her husband died while performing official duty as a result of violence, terrorism, robbery or dacoity or having died within five years of his first appointment or before reaching the age of 30 years whichever is later and the ex-gratia amount having been received by the petitioner, no case for any direction to issue any writ for compassionate appointment is made out. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Order Date :- 19.2.2025 Pachhere/- Digitally signed by :- SATYENDRA SINGH PACHHERE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench