EMLAMMA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner being the wife of one Ganapathi Sangannavaru who was working as a Pourakarmika in respondent No.5 - Municipal Council is before this Court seeking following reliefs:

(2.) Case of the petitioner is that her husband Ganapathi passed away on 21/2/2006 leaving behind his wife the petitioner herein and two daughters namely Kumari Reshma and Kumari Parvati. When the petitioner was in the process of seeking release of death-cum-retirement benefits of said Ganapathi, one Tulajamma objected on the premise that she being the legally wedded wife of said Ganapathi, resulting in stalemate. A suit in O.S.No.173/2016 came to be filed by the petitioner and her two daughters against the said Tuljamma, in which the official respondents are also made parties. The said suit was filed seeking declaration that the petitioner herein is the legally wedded wife of said Ganapathi and two daughters were born out of the said marriage. Consequent relief of permanent injunction restraining said Tuljamma from drawing/receiving any pension was also sought for. In addition, a direction to rectify the service register of said Ganapathi by deleting the name of said Tuljamma was also sought for. A compromise was entered into between the petitioner, her two daughters on the one part and said Tuljamma on the other part. In terms of which, said Tuljamma agreed, admitted, confirmed and declared that the petitioner herein who is the plaintiff No.1 in the said suit was the legally wedded wife of said Ganapathi and that said Tuljamma - defendant No.1 in the said suit has no objection in rectifying the service records of deceased Ganapathi, in which her name was wrongly entered as the nominee. That the said Tuljamma also did not have any objection in petitioner herein and her daughters receiving the death-cum-retirement service benefits of said Ganapathi. The said suit was accordingly decreed in terms of the compromise dtd. 25/4/2019. Based on the said compromise decree, petitioner herein made a representation dtd. 8/9/2021. In response, the Under Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Karnataka issued a communication to the Director of Pension and Small Savings, in which it is contented that since the Civil Court have no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the issues with regard to the pension, the State Government is not bound by the orders of the Civil Court. Thus, giving rise to the present petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner, reiterating the facts narrated above, submits that in the light of the interse dispute between the petitioner and one Tuljamma having been amicably resolved, there is no impediment for the respondent State to process the payment of pension and the retirement benefits payable in respect of the services rendered by deceased Ganapathi. She submits that the reasons assigned by the respondent - State through its Under Secretary in terms of Annexure-E apart from being unsustainable, also contrary to the facts. Hence, seeks for allowing the petition.