THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PRINTING AND PUBLICATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD AND ANOTHER Vs. D. MANJULA, W/O LATE D. ANJANEYULU, H.NO. 77/124/10

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The heartless officers of the Government of Andhra Pradesh are the petitioners before us in this writ petition.

(2.) The husband of the 1st respondent herein, by name Sri D. Anjaneyulu, while working as a Binder with the Government Regional Press, Kurnool, died on 26-11-2013. Obviously and we assume it to be so, the said deceased employee D. Anjaneyulu has put in requisite length qualifying service to the Government of Andhra Pradesh to earn eligibility for payment of pension. Such of those employees, who have earned the eligibility for securing pension, when die leaving behind a spouse, the spouse is liable to be paid family pension (Rule 50 of the Andhra Pradesh Revised Pension Rules, 1980). It appears that the 1st respondent herein, in the company of her son, the 2nd respondent, who is said to be an unemployed young individual, has submitted papers for securing payment of family pension and also settlement of all other terminal benefits. The mistake committed by the 1st and the 2nd respondents herein appears to be that an appointment was also sought for in favour of the 2nd respondent, son of the deceased employee, under the "Compassionate Appointment Scheme". The troubles faced by the 1st and the 2nd respondents have not evoked the necessary sympathy from the officers of the State Government. The reason for this attitude appears to be that during the life time of the employee, i.e., Sri D. Anjaneyulu, his social status certificate as a member of Scheduled Castes has been cancelled by the competent authority. Sri D. Anjaneyulu carried the said matter by way of a writ petition to this Court i.e. W.P.No. 10477 of 2006. That writ petition was entertained by this Court and an appropriate interim order was also passed therein. As a consequence of which, no penal action could be taken against Sri D. Anjaneyulu during his life time. Possibly, the cause in the aforesaid writ petition may have abated upon his death, but that would be a matter for the 1st and the 2nd respondents to consider and we are not required to pronounce an opinion thereon.

(3.) But, however, the pendency of that writ petition or for that matter, the cloud which hung over the head of Sri D. Anjaneyulu, during his life time regarding his social status claim, could not have detained the authority competent from releasing and paying the family pension for his widow. Similarly, the other terminal benefit, namely, Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity also could not have been held back for want of clearance of the disputed social status claim of Sri D. Anjaneyulu. This Court as well as the Supreme Court have been consistently pointing out that payment of Pension and payment of Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity, are not acts of charity or bounty on the part of the State Government concerned. Such payments are made in recognition of the services rendered by the individual concerned during his best years. Payment of Pension was recognised as a case of deferred payment due for the services rendered. If pension has got to be denied to an individual, who ceases to be a Government employee, an appropriate proceeding should have been initiated in accordance with Rule-9 of the Andhra Pradesh Revised Pension Rules, 1980.