MANKUNVARBA MANHARSINH VAGHELA Vs. THARAD NAGAR PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, who is widow of the deceased employee of Tharad Nagar Panchayat-respondent No. 1 (herein 'Panchayat' for short) has filed this petition seeking direction against the Panchayat and the State Government to pay to her family pension from the date of the death of her husband.

(2.) Petitioner's husband Manaharsinh Bhagvansinh Vaghela ('Deceased' for short) was employed as Clerk by the Panchayat on 8/11/1971. He continued to be employed as Clerk by the Panchayat till he died on 12/01/1986. It would, therefore, appear that he died in harness and when he died he had completed more than 14 years service. Petitioner claims that she is entitled to family pension under the Family Pension Scheme applicable to Government servants. She, therefore, made representation to the Panchayat on 13/04/1987 to give her family pension with effect from the date of the death of her husband. The Panchayat, however, by its reply dated 19/07/1988 stated that the Panchayat had by Resolution recommended to pay pension to the petitioner, but the Accounts Officer at Palanpur had stated that under the existing Government Rules nothing was required to be done. The Panchayat, therefore, stated that no action could be taken on her representation and that her representation was filed. Thereafter, petitioner's Advocate gave notice dated 1/11/1988 to the Panchayat and the State Government to pay family pension to the petitioner. The Panchayat, however, again informed the petitioner that under the existing Rules of the Government, nothing could be done. So far as Government was concerned, all that it did was to acknowledge the notice given by the petitioner. Since the Panchayat and the Government did not pay her family pension, petitioner filed this petition praying inter alia for a direction against the respondents to pay her family pension in accordance with the relevant scheme of the Rules.

(3.) In State of Gujarat v. Ramanlal, [1983 (1)] XXIV (1) GLR 708, the Supreme Court held as follows :