PARVATHI RATHNAM Vs. THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR OFFICER AND SECRETARY BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having informed the respondents that her name has been changed from Pathima C., to Parvathi Rathnam in the year 2004, having retired on 30.6.2013, the petitioner continues to pray that her pensionary benefits, and retirai benefits should be released to her by the respondents.

(2.) Briefly the facts of the case are that the petitioner was born as a Christian, and she had been baptized in the name of Pathima C., D/o Cyril M. The said name of Pathima C. was recorded even in her S.S.L.C. marks card. However, on 29.11971, she married one Mr. Rajarathnam who was working as an employee with the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board. After her marriage, she converted to Hinduism, and her in-laws changed her name from Pathima C. to Parvathi Rathnam. During the course of his service, the petitioner's husband, Mr. Rajarathnam, expired on 27.11.1989. Consequently, the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment with the respondents. While applying for compassionate appointment, she submitted an affidavit dated 18.11989. Initially, the respondents granted the benefit of family pension, and other retiral benefits to her. However, on 3.1990, she was given a compassionate appointment, in 'D' group, on the post of Additional Staff in the establishment. Subsequently, by order dated 19.10.2002, she was promoted to the post of Assistant. By order dated 16.1.2013, she was further promoted to the post of Office Superintendent. Thereafter, on 30.6.2013, she retired from the said post.

(3.) During the course of her tenure, on 20.2004, she had clearly informed the respondents that although her original name was Pathima C, but having married Mr. Rajarathnam, she has changed her name to Parvathi Rathnam. From 2004 till 2013, the respondents had acted on the said affidavit. They had changed her name in the service record from Pathima C. to Parvathi Rathnam. Even in the seniority list, and the promotion order mentioned hereinabove, her name was shown as Parvathi Rathnam. However, when the petitioner applied for the grant of retiral benefits, the respondents have issued a letter dated 212.2014, directing the petitioner to seek a declaration from the civil court that, in fact, she is the same person as Pathima C, and to submit an indemnity bond in order to cover any loss that may be suffered by the respondents. Hence, this petition before this Court.