NINGAMMA W/O LATE G.R. RANGAPPA Vs. THE CHAIRMAN, KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LTD. AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER , assailing the correctness of the Official Memorandum dated 4th December 1999 issued by second respondent vide Annexure A only to the extent of benefits paid to respondents 3 to 5 with a direction to make good the same to the petitioner. Further, petitioner has sought for a direction, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to provide her with a suitable employment on compassionate grounds either to petitioner or to her nominee.

(2.) THE grievance of petitioner in the instant writ petition is that, petitioner is the first wife of the deceased Sri. G.R. Rangappa, who was the employee of the respondents 1 and 2 - Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (now called "Company"). While the deceased husband of petitioner, late Sri. G.R. Rangappa was working in the respondents 1 and 2 - Company as Mechanic Grade II Telecommunication Division, Bangalore Zone, Bangalore, he passed away on 4th December 1984 and the retirement benefits payable to his legal heirs has been extended/paid to petitioner and respondents 3 to 5. It is the case of petitioner that, the said benefit has been extended to respondents 3 to 5 contrary to Chapter IX Section F of Regulation 221(b) of the Karnataka Electricity Board Employees' Service Regulations and that, the said benefit ought to have been extended only to her. Therefore, it is submitted that, the said pensionary benefits paid by respondents 1 and 2 in favour of petitioner as well as respondents 3 to 5 cannot be sustained and that, the authorities have committed a grave error and proceeded to settle the said benefits contrary to the direction issued by this Court in the Miscellaneous First Appeal in MFA No. 1639/1993 disposed of on 20th June 1996 and the order passed in Review Petition No. 539/1998 disposed of on 15th February 1999. When the authorities failed to consider her request in a proper manner, petitioner was constrained to issue the legal notice through the counsel pointing out the error committed by respondents. Therefore, in view of non consideration of the earlier directions issued by this Court in the Miscellaneous First Appeal and for not considering the legal notice issued dated 19th October 2000 vide Annexure E, petitioner herein felt necessitated to present the instant writ petition, seeking appropriate reliefs, as stated supra.

(3.) THE principal ground urged by petitioner in the instant writ petition is that, respondents 1 and 2 have committed a grave error in paying the pensionary benefits to respondents 3 to 5 in gross violation of the relevant Regulation of the respondents 1 and 2 - Company. Hence, the same is liable to be set aside. Further, he submitted that, the respondents 1 and 2 have shown undue interest in favour of respondents 3 to 5 in payment of death benefits to them though they are not entitled to the same. Therefore, it is his case that, the said pensionary benefits already paid to respondents 3 to 5 is required to be returned to petitioner, being the first and legally wedded wife of deceased employee of respondents - Company, Sri. G.R. Rangappa. Further, he submitted that, in spite of submitting the application for providing an appointment on compassionate grounds on account of the death of the deceased husband of the petitioner either to petitioner or her nominee, the same is neither considered nor disposed of nor the legal notice issued through the counsel vide Annexure E dated 19th October 2000 is considered by respondents - Company, resulting in clear violation of the relevant Regulations of the Company regarding appointment on compassionate grounds. Hence, in view of inaction on the part of respondents 1 and 2 in not disbursing the entire pensionary benefit to petitioner alone and not providing her or her nominee with suitable employment on compassionate grounds, petitioner herein felt necessitated to present the instant writ petition, seeking appropriate reliefs, as stated supra.