VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA,J. - (1.) Widow of Late Shri Ramchandra has not been accorded pensionary benefits subsequent to the death of her husband, and therefore, she has been impelled to institute the present writ proceedings, praying for the following relief(s):- "(i) by an appropriate writ, order or direction the respondents may kindly be directed to pay the amount of family pension from the date on which the petitioner became entitled with ail consequential benefits along with interest and continue to pay the same in future and further the respondents may kindly be directed to pay arrears of provident fund and gratuity and other like retiral benefits for which the deceased employee was entitled. (ii) any other order which this Hon "?ble court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner. (iii) cost of the writ petition may also be awarded in favour of the petitioner."
(2.) Briefly, the skeletal material facts necessary for appreciation of the controversy raised are that the Late Shri Ramchandra expired on 16th November, 1974, while working on the post of "?Beldar "? under the control of the State-respondents. It is pleaded case of the petitioner that she being nominee of the deceased employee (husband), requested for the release of family pension. However, certain amount on account of Contributory Provident Fund was released but pension was accorded to her. A notice for demand of justice addressed to the respondents through his counsel on 5th June, 2005, did evoke any response either.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. S.K. Singodiya, reiterating the pleaded facts and grounds of the writ application has emphatically argued that after the death of petitioner "?s husband, the amount of GPF was paid to her but the State-respondents have denied the benefit of family pension though this benefit has been accorded to identically situated persons.;