SHAIK DILSHAD Vs. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:-

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the husband of the petitioner by name Sri Shaik Shanawaz was appointed as Mechanic of Bore well and while he was in service expired on 31/10/2003. He has two wives. The petitioner is the second wife. It is the case of the petitioner that the pensionary benefits of her late husband have not been sanctioned for several years due to disputes between the two wives and finally the disputes have been settled before the Lok Adalat, Putur in PLP No.14 of 2013. To that effect, the petitioner is accepted to receive the family pension and leave the death benefits and any other amount to the first wife i.e., Smt Noorjahan. It is further stated that the petitioner made several representations to the respondents No.1 and 2 including the District Collector, Chittoor to settle the family pension. However, the pension of the deceased has not been settled so far under the guise of correspondence between the respondents, which is illegal and arbitrary. Hence, the present writ petition.

(3.) Counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent denying all the allegations made in the petition and submits that Sri S.Shanwaz, Pump Mechanic was expired on 31/10/2003. As per the documents produced, he had two wives namely the first wife Smt S.Noorjahan and the second wife Smt S. Dilshad, who is the petitioner herein and both wives of the individual have compromised and a joint agreement was submitted for settlement for death benefits. It is further stated that compassionate appointment was given to the son of the deceased employee as Attender i.e., S/o S.Noorjahan, first wife of the deceased employee and as per the minimum pay Rs.1875.00 family proposals prepared in the name of Smt S.Dilshad, second wife of the deceased employee and submitted to the District Audit Officer, Chittoor. But the family pension has not been sanctioned and returned the above proposal as per Government Circular Memo No.36840-A/329/A2/Pen.I/93 Fin. & Plg. Department, dtd. 11/9/1996 since the second wife is not entitled for family pension.