D.G.R.PATNAIK,J. - (1.) In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for a direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the office order No. 49 dated 9.7.2007 (Annexure -6) issued by the respondents whereby and where under the petitioner's claim for payment of the insurance money of Old Group Insurance Scheme has been rejected.
(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that her husband was employed as Accounts Clerk in the Public Health Department under the State Government and was posted at Chaibasa and he died on 4.4.1998. After her husband's death, the retiral benefits were paid to her but under the head of group insurance, out of the total amount of Rs. 96,000/ - which ought to have been paid to her, the respondents had paid only Rs. 30,000/ - and illegally retained the balance of Rs. 66,000/ -. Earlier, vide writ petition W.P.(S) No. 6780 of 2006, the petitioner had made similar prayer for a direction to the respondents to pay her the balance amount of Rs. 66,000/ - under the Old Group Insurance Scheme. The aforesaid writ application, vide order dated 30.4.2007, was disposed of by the Court with a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's prayer and to pass an appropriate order within the time frame stipulated in the order. The petitioner had submitted her fresh representation but the same was refused by the respondents by the impugned order on the ground that the petitioner's husband had died on 4.4.1998 and therefore, the payment of money was to be guided under the New Pension Scheme and not according to the old scheme. Challenging the aforesaid contention of the respondents, learned counsel for the petitioner refers to relevant rules under the Bihar Government Employees' New Group Insurance Scheme (Annexure -7) and also explains that under Clause 2 of the aforesaid rules which was made effective from 1.4.1998. the rules under the old scheme was to remain applicable in respect of Government servants who were employed prior to 1.4.1998, till 31.3.1998 and the employees were given an opportunity to elect as to whether they prefer to be guided according to the rules under the old scheme or under the new scheme. If any employee elects to be governed by the old rules then on his retirement/death, the payment shall be made in accordance with the old rules and if an employee does not make any such election, it will be deemed that he would be guided by the rules under the new scheme. Referring to Clause 9 of the said rules, learned counsel would explain that the old rules shall continue to apply to those employees who did not opt for the new rules and since In the case of the petitioner's husband, no such election was made by him to be guided by new rules, therefore, he should have been guided in accordance with the rules under the old scheme. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents denying and disputing the claim of the petitioner. It is contended that the New Group Insurance Rules, 1997 came into existence with effect from 1.4.1998 and the petitioner's husband died on 4.4.1998 and he was, therefore, paid the group insurance amount of Rs. 30,000/ -alongwith interest, totaling to Rs. 17,000/ -. It is further stated that the petitioner's husband did not opt within the stipulated period that by which rule he wants to be guided and therefore, under the provisions of the New Group Insurance Rules, 1997, it was deemed that new rules will apply to him. As such, the petitioner is not entitled to make any further claim beyond what has already been given to her under the new rules.
(3.) FROM the facts and circumstances, I find force in the contention made by the counsel for the respondents. As per Clause 2 of the New Group Insurance Rules, 1997 read with Clause 9, it is evident that the rules under the old scheme was to be applied only to those employees who had specifically opted for the old rules whereas those employees who did not opt whatsoever, they were deemed to have accepted the new rules for their future guidance in the matter of payment their insurance money.;