MACHHALAWATI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER 's husband, who was a Sub -Inspector of Police in the Police Department of the Government of U.P., retired from service on 27 -2 -1951 and expired on 17 -12 -1960. Petitioner, being the dependent of her husband, has filed this writ petition for writ of mandamus commanding the Respondents, namely, the State of U.P. Superintendent of Police, Farrukhabad and the Accountant General (Pension), U.P. Allahabad to pay her arrears of family pension with effect from 1 -1 -1978 and continue to pay the said pension in future regularly every month as and when it falls due.

(2.) IN 1964 the Government of India introduced a Family Pension Scheme for its employees providing for family pension to the widow of these Government servants, who have exercised their option for family pension and in pursuance thereof had contributed two months' pay or certain amount in lieu thereof from their death -cum - -retirement gratuity. On 22 -9 -1977 the Central Government issued an order by which the aforesaid contributory family pension scheme was abolished and the widows of those Government servants who had exercised their option in pursuance of the 1964 scheme, were declared entitled to the family pension without any contribution. Although, the contributory family pension scheme was abolished in 1977 but the benefits were confined to the widows of only those Government servants, who had exercised their option earlier with the result that widows of those, who had not exercised option under 1964 scheme and had not made any contribution there under were not given the family pension under the new Family pension scheme of 1977 although under the new scheme the contributions were not required to be made by the Government servants. This in -equality led to filing of writ petitions, which were ultimately allowed by the Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Poonamal v. Union of India : AIR 1985 SC 1196, and directions were given for grant of family pension including the arrears to the widows of all the Central Government employees with effect from 22 -9 -1977.

(3.) WHILE considering the similar family pension scheme of 1977 of the Central Government, the Supreme Court has held the non -payment of family pension to the widows of those Central Government Employees, who had not exercised option under 1964 scheme as arbitrary and discriminatory. The relevant extract of the judgment of the Supreme Court is reproduced below: