Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25083 (RAJ)

ASHEESH SHARMA v. S B I AND ORS

CW/1942/2015 · 2025-05-01

Sudesh Bansal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:18425] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1942/2015 Asheesh Sharma son of Late Shri Yogesh Chand, aged about 30 years, resident of Plot No.98, Scheme No.3, Basant Vihar Colony, Alwar. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Bank of India through the Chairman cum Managing Director, L.H.O. Corporate Office, State Bank of India Bhawan, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. 2. The Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India, Region-III, Jaipur Administrative office-Ist, Nehru Palace, Tonk Road, Jaipur. 3. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Mahal Chowk Branch, Alwar. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sidharth Singh for Mr. Abhi Goyal For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 01/05/2025 1. Instant writ petition was filed by petitioner way back on 05.02.2015, however, till date neither service of respondents has been effected nor the petitioner has filed the PF and notices despite giving opportunity, hence in such circumstances, the writ petition has been heard on merits at this stage itself. 2. It appears that petitioner was denied compassionate appointment vide order dated 10.04.2010 (Annx.4) on the ground that at that point of time in the State Bank of India, the scheme of employment on compassionate basis was not applicable. [2025:RJ-JP:18425] (2 of 2) [CW-1942/2015] 3. Petitioner has impugned the order of denial to grant compassionate appointment vide order dated 10.04.2010, placing reliance on the scheme of compassionate appointment made applicable in the Public Sector Banks w.e.f. 05.08.2014. A perusal of scheme clearly shows that the scheme has been made effective by the Ministry of Finance w.e.f. 05.08.2014 and such scheme cannot be held applicable retrospectively, hence, petitioner cannot be granted benefit of such scheme, to impugn the order dated 10.04.2010. 4. There being no force in the writ petition, same is hereby dismissed accordingly. 5. All pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J RONAK JAIMAN/32