HEERA DEVI Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
LAWS(ALL)-2006-7-125
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on July 02,2006

HEERA DEVI Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) HEARD Sri C. D. Bahuguna, Advo cate for the petitioner and Standing Counsel for the respondents.
(2.) THE present writ petition has been filed for a writ of mandamus di recting the respondents to pay the pen sion and other outstanding dues of her husband to the petitioner w. e. f. 16-03-1983 (when her husband was retired from service on ground of ill-health) to 28-03-1989; and pay family pension to the petitioner with effect from 29-03-1989 when her husband died due to his continued ill-health. Briefly stated according to the petitioner the husband of the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Pashu Sewak, a class IV post, in the de partment of Animal Husbandry in Dis trict Pithoragarh as on 10-6-1967 and has put-in more than 15 years of serv ice in the department of Animal Hus bandry as a class-IV employee to the satisfaction of higher officers and dur ing the entire service period, no adverse remark was awarded to him and his work and conduct remained up to the mark. No disciplinary proceeding was ever initiated against him for any mis conduct. In the year 1981-82, when he was posted as Pashu Sewak at Khetikhan, District Pithoragarh, some serious disease developed to petition er's husband and his health started de teriorating day by day. On 16-03-1983, her husband was compulsorily retired on ground of his continuous ill health and due to the reason of his continueous ill health and he breathed his last on 29-03-1989. The petitioner has further sub mitted that since the husband of the pe titioner had put-in more than 15 years service in the department of the Animal Husbandry, it was the legitimate expec tation of petitioner's husband to get pension after his retirement but he was not paid pension as a result of which proper medical treatment could not be provided to him during his life time and resultantly he died before time.
(3.) IT has been stated by the peti tioner in Paragraph 9 and 11 of the writ petition that the Deputy Director, Ani mal Husbandry, Kumaun Division, Nainital vide his letter dated 20-08-1996, Annexure-1 to the writ petition, directed the Chief Veterinary Officer, Pithoragarh to take appropriate steps for providing family pension to the pe titioner. The relevant portion of the let ter of the Deputy Director dated 20-08-1996 is reproduced below: Hindi The Chief Veterinary Officer, Pithoragarh supplied all the required papers including service book of peti tioner's husband to the Director, Pen sion, U. P. Lucknow, through the letter dated 12-03-1997, a copy of which has been enclosed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition. The contents of the letter of the Chief Veterinary Officer, Pithoragarh is reproduced to below: Hindi;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.