STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. KEDAR NATH SOOD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C. A. No. 14081/96.

(2.) By the judgment under appeal, the High Court had directed the appellants to grant family pension to the first respondent herein. Undoubtedly, this is a hard case. Having regard to the facts, strictly speaking, the Government should have come forward to the rescue of the first respondent, but, unfortunately, that was not done.

(3.) The High Court, purporting to follow a decision of this Court, has granted pension which does not appear to be the correct position. The relevant Rule for grant of family pension in this case will be Rule 54(14)(b)(i) of CCS (Pension) Rules 1972, according to which the father will not be a member of the family or dependent to get the family pension. This fact is also not disputed. Interpreting a similar rule, this Court in State of Gujarat, through Chief Secretary v. Savitri Devi, (1996) 1 SCC 558 : (1996 AIR SCW 343) has observed as follows :-