M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) HEARD Mrs. Vandana Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
(2.) PETITIONER by way of the instant writ application prays for quashing the order dated 14.2.2005 passed by Assistant Manager, department of Personnel & Final Settlement, Bokaro Steel Plant, Bokaro whereby he has refused to pay to the petitioner the death -cum -retiral benefits of his late brother on behalf of his two nephews, inspite of being appointed their lawful guardian by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass : Petitioner 'selder brother, namely, late Amar Mandal was an employee of Bokaro Steel Plant. He was married to late Angana Devi and out of the wedlock two sons, namely, Arjun Kumar Mandal and Gautam Kumar Mandal were born. Angana Devi, died leaving behind her two above -named sons. Amar Mandal after the death of his first wife, married another lady, namely, Lata Mandalani, from whom one daughter was born. Amar Mandal also died on 30th June, 2001 in Bokaro General Hospital and after his death his second wife left her matrimonial house and went to her parent 's place. Two sons of Amar Mandal have been looked after by the petitioner who is their uncle. Petitioner 'sbrother late Amar Mandal nominated his first wife to receive the amount payable on account of Provident Fund, Gratuity and in case of her death as per the nomination, his elder son, namely, Arjun Kumar Mandal would receive the said amount. The second wife of the petitioner 'sbrother, namely, Smt. Lata Mandalani was made nominee in all policies of LIC 'staken by the late Amar Mandal which amounted to approx Rs. 3,02,824/ - which have already been withdrawn by Smt. Lata Mandalani. Petitioner, thereafter, approached the respondents to release the amount as he has been looking after the minor sons of the deceased but the respondents informed the petitioner that the amount shall be released only after the petitioner is appointed as guardian by a competent Court. Consequently, petitioner applied for guardianship before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro which was registered as Guardianship Case No. 8 of 2002. In the said Guardianship Case, Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro vide order dated 31.1.2004 appointed the petitioner as legal guardian of both the minor sons of late Amar Mandal. Petitioner thereafter approached the respondent -authority and produced the order but this time the respondents refused to release the amount and stated that petitioner cannot be given the said amount and the same would be paid only to the son of the late Amar Mandal when he attains majority.
(3.) RESPONDENTS appeared and filed their counter -affidavit stating, inter alia, that although the petitioner was appointed as legal guardian by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro but for the welfare of the minors ' amount shall be released only after attaining majority. It is stated that as per the records of the company, the elder son who is the nominee will attain majority on 6.9.2006. His date of birth as per records of the company is 7.9.1980. It is stated that petitioner is not entitled to any equitable relief and the writ is fit to be dismissed. However, it is further stated that the respondents after getting the matter examined by the concerned department of the respondent -company, the amount to the extent necessary for the education and up keep of the minors would be released.;