SHANTI DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for mandamus directing the respondents to pay the family pension to the petitioner and also to provide job to her son on compassionate ground.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the husband of the petitioner was engaged as Chowkidar by respondent No. 3 in February, 1983. He died during the service on 13.9.1995. It is alleged that the husband of the petitioner was in apay scale of Rs. 750-940 with facilities of General Provident Fund, Group Insurance etc. After the death of her husband the petitioner moved an application before the authorities for family pension and completed necessary formalities by filling the forms. Also, she wrote to the respondent No. 3 that her son the given appointment on compassionate ground. The husband of the petitioner before his death had fulfilled all necessary qualification for his regularization under the scheme of Ministry of Communication. In the year 1992 case of the petitioner's husband for regularization was sent to the higher authorities. But the husband of the petitioner was wrongly denied" regularization and consequently the petitioner was wrongly denied the post retiremental benefits like family pension and appointment to her son on compassionate ground. Several representation were made to the respondents but went in vein. Hence the writ petition.

(3.) The respondents filed their counter affidavit in which it is admitted that Sri Kanhaiya Lal Thapaliyal, husband of the petitioner was appointed as part time Chowkidar in Dehradun Kutchary Post Office vide Memo. dated 14.2.1983, It is also admitted that the said employee died on 13.9.1995. It is also admitted in the counter affidavit that on 16.11.1996 petitioner applied for appointment of her son on compassionate ground but it is stated that since the deceased was casual labour of Temporary status as such the rules relating to the appointment under dying-in-harness did not apply to his case. In the para-wise reply it has been stated that the monthly wages of the deceased, from February 1983 to November 1989, was Rs. 371 per month, which was, revised w.e.f. 5.2.1986 and increased to Rs. 563 per month. But since the petitioner's husband was not absorbed before his death as regular Group 'D' employee, the 50% of the services rendered by him under temporary status were not to be counted for the purposes of his retiremental benefits. It is, however, stated in the counter affidavit that merely by serving for 12 year as casual labour one does not become entitled to be the pensionary benefits. But it is admitted that pension papers were submitted by the petitioner and same were forwarded to the competent authority i. e. Director of Postal Account, Lucknow, where from the same were rejected as the petitioner was not a regular employee of the department. On the same ground the rules relating to the appointment under dying-in-harness were stated to be not applicable.