JAGDISH PRASAD TRIVEDI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner had filed this petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India making a prayer to issue direction to respondents authority to make payment of pension to petitioner.

(2.) Counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that an FIR has been registered at the instance of Daughter-in-law against petitioner. Due to pendency of said case, pension is not being paid to petitioner. It is submitted that respondents ought to have taken action in accordance with Sec. 64(1) (a) of M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 and petitioner ought to have been paid provisional pension.

(3.) Government Advocate appearing for State is unable to counter aforesaid preposition of law.