P B AMEENA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner's son who was an employee in the Irrigation Department, died in harness on 12.9.1994. The family pension due to the petitioner was not disbursed to her so far. The petitioner approached this Court earlier by filing O. P. No. 7001 of 1998 which was disposed of by judgment dated 6.4.1998 with a direction to consider and pass orders on the representation filed by the petitioner. Accordingly Ext. P5 was passed rejecting the petitioners request. But it has been stated in Ext. P5 that as per the existing rules the petitioner's request for family pension merits no consideration since the eligibility of the member of the family for family pension in this case had ended with the marriage of the daughter of the deceased employee. Therefore, the petitioner was not entitled for family pension. A petition to review the decision in Ext. P5 was rejected as per Ext. P6 and thereafter by Ext. P5. These orders are under challenge in this Original Petition.

(2.) According to the petitioner, under R.90(6A) of Part III K.S.R. the petitioner is entitled to get family pension as the parent of the deceased employee. The petitioner was solely depending on the deceased son for her maintenance and she has no other source of income or support for maintenance. This is evident from Ext. P5 certificate issued by the Tahsildar.

(3.) The contention of the petitioner seems to be on the basis of sub-r.(6) of R.90 of Part III K.S.R. which defines 'family' for purposes of these rules, which reads as follows: