MANCHHABA KIRITSINH SARVAIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent,1865, is directed against the judgement and order dtd. 6/10/2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.18492 of 2016, whereby the learned Single Judge has rejected the writ petition filed by the appellant claiming family pension.

(2.) Learned advocate Mr.Vicky Mehta appearing for the appellant-original petitioner has submitted that the learned Single Judge has failed to appreciate the fact of the option filled by the late husband of the appellant opting for pension. He has submitted that the late husband of the appellant filled the option form on 30/1/1993 and since the pensionary benefit was not conferred to the appellant, she has filed a writ petition being Special Civil Application No.21640 of 2007, which was disposed of by an order dtd. 22/8/2007 directing the respondents to take appropriate decision. It appears that thereafter, the District Development Officer, Amreli, rejected the request of pension and it was held that the late husband of the appellant was not entitled for pension as he did not fill any option, as per the Government Resolution dtd. 29/9/1992.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr.Vicky Mehta appearing for the appellant, while referring to the communication dtd. 28/2/2007 written by the Gram Panchayat to the District Development Officer, has submitted that the Gram Panchayat has recommended the case of the appellant for payment of pension and it is categorically recorded therein that the late husband of the appellant had opted for pension, as per the Government Resolution dtd. 29/9/1992.