JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)THE petitionerâ„¢s husband, after rendering 20 years of service as a Professor of chemistry in G.G.M. Science College, Jammu, died on
17 -9 -1985 when he was only 45 years of age. He was survived by his wife and three minor female children. In her claim for the grant of family
pension, respondent No. 3 issued an intimation letter dated 1 -11 -1985
addressed to the Treasury Officer, Addl. Treasury, Jammu, intimating her
that her family pension at the rate of Rs.494.40 and D.A.@ 581 per month
w.e.f. from 18 -9 -I985. had been allowed with a further instruction to her
to appear before the Treasury Officer to receive the payment. Calculating
the pension under rule 20 (bb) of the Family Pension -cum -gratuity Rules,
the family pension of the petitioner is likely to be reduced w.e.f. from
17.9.1992 when seven yearâ„¢s period is to lapse. It is submitted that SRO -310 of l986 dated 8.5:1986 provided that the family pension of the
dependants of the government servants who die in harness, would be equal
to the amount of last pay drawn by the deceased official for the first 7
years and thereafter the family pension was to be paid at the rate of 50%
of the pay last drawn or twice the family pension admissible as per rule
20 (ii) (aaa) of the Family Pension -cum -gratuity Rules, which ever was less, For the next 7 years or till the deceased would have attained the
age of 62 years whichever was earlier and thereafter the family pension
would be made payable at the ordinary rates laid down in rule 20 (ii)
(aaa) of the aforesaid rules, t has been prayed that the petitioner is
entitled to the grant of benefit of SRO -310 of 1986 by quashing the words
These rules shall be deemed to have come into effect from 1.1.1986"
incorporated in the said SRO, It is submitted that denial to the
petitioner of the grant of benefit was violative of Article 14 of the
Constitution of India.
(2.)IN the reply filed on behalf of the respondents it has been submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to the grant of the benefit
of SRO -310 and that her petition being misconceived is liable to be
dismissed. It is submitted that as no fundamental or legal right of the
petitioner has been violated she is not entitled to maintain the present
petition. It is contended that as per SRO 310 of 1986, family pension at
the rate of last pay drawn by the deceased employee who dies while in
service is admissible in service or upto the superannuation of the
deceased employee whichever is earlier but it is contended that the
petitioner is not entitled to it. It is further submitted that the
doctrine of classification was evolved to sustain a State action designed
to help segment of the society in need of succor. The cut off date i.e.
1.1.1986 is claimed to be not arbitrary or devoid of rational consideration. In fixing the cut -off date the authorities are stated to
have not acted mala fide with a view to deprive those who retired before
1.1.1986 of the benefit it was not practical to extend the benefits to such employees as UG scheme became operative i.e. from 1.1.1896.
(3.)I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
On 11.3.1993, learned counsel for the parties agreed for disposal of the case at the admission stage. Vide a detailed order dated 15.7.1992
a direction was issued to respondents 1 to 3 to raise pension of the
petitioner in terms of para 2 of SRO -310 of 1986 forthwith upon the
petitionerâ„¢s furnishing an under -taking that in case the petitioner
fails in her petition, she will reimburse the amount overdrawn by her.
Learned counsel for the respondents have not seriously contested
regarding the maintainability of the writ petition. Otherwise also, it
cannot be said that no fundamental or statutory right is alleged to have
been violated inasmuch as the petitioner has preferred her claim upon the
alleged violation of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India. The pension
cannot be termed to be a mere concession and admittedly when the
petitioner has been held entitled to the grant of pension, it cannot be
said that she has no right to claim enhanced pension on the basis of
SRO -310 of 1986.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.