LAWS(ORI)-2007-11-17

KISHORI DASH Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

Decided On November 27, 2007
Kishori Dash Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ORISSA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this writ petition is the widow of late Madhu Mangal Dash, who was working as a primary school teacher. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition with a prayer to quash the office order No. 3565 dated 16.10.2003 of the District Inspector of Schools, Bolangir, rejecting her claim for grant of family pension with T.I. thereon.

(2.) THE late husband of the petitioner was appointed as a primary school teacher on 1.5.1957 in the Babupali Primary School. While continuing as such, he remained on leave with effect from 31.8.1970 and could not join in his service because of prolonged illness. Ultimately, he died on 12.5.1993. The case of the petitioner is that in normal course, her husband would have retired from service with effect from 16.4.1995 as his date of birth was 16.4.1937. The petitioner filed O.J.C. No. 2890 of 2001 claiming family pension, T.I. and unpaid dues of her late husband. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court by order dated 2.3.2001 directing the opp.party No. 3 - District Inspector of Schools, Bolangir to verify the relevant records and pass necessary orders with regard to payment of the petitioner's dues within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the said order. The petitioner, thereafter, submitted all relevant documents before the District Inspector of Schools for verification. After verification of the records, the District Inspector of Schools, on ascertaining that the petitioner is the widow of late Madhu Mangal Dash, a primary school teacher, by his letter dated 16.1.2002 under Annexure -5 recommended the case of the petitioner to the Director, Elementary Education, Orissa, Bhubaneswar for sanction of family pension and T.I. and to move the Government for regularization of the leave period of the deceased husband of the petitioner from 12.8.1970 to 12.5.1993. The petitioner has alleged that even though the District Inspector of Schools sent the above letter to the Director, Elementary Education, Orissa, Bhubaneswar without waiting for any order, he passed the impugned order under Annexure -1 on 16.10.2003 rejecting the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the deceased husband of the petitioner worked as a primary school teacher from 1.5.1957 to 12.8.1970 and thereafter, he was absent from his duty since 31.8.1970 for 23 years and, accordingly, it would be deemed that he abandoned the service. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the District Inspector of Schools, the petitioner has' preferred this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution for appropriate relief.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the opp.parties denying the claim of the petitioner on the ground that pursuant to the orders passed by this Court in the previous writ petition, i.e., O.J.C. No. 2890 of 2001, the case of the petitioner was referred to the Director, Elementary Education, Orissa, Bhubaneswar and, as the question of regularization of service of the late husband of the petitioner was pending at the Government level, he having found to be unauthorizedly absent from 31.8.1970 to 12.5.1993, the Government of Orissa in its School and Mass Education Department letter dated 25.8.2003 communicated to the District Inspector of Schools that the Government has moved the Law Department for their considered views on the order dated 22.3.2001 of this Court passed in O.J.C. No. 2890 of 2001 and the Law Department, in turn, has sought the advice of the Advocate General, who advised them that in view of the admitted position that the Government servant has absconded since 31.8.1970 and was absent from duty for 23 years, he is deemed to have been abandoned the service. So the claim of his wife (petitioner herein) should be rejected. In view of such opinion, the District Inspector of Schools was requested to take action accordingly by passing appropriate order. It is, thus, pleaded by the opp.parties that in accordance with the opinion of the learned Advocate General, it was treated that the late husband of the petitioner having abandoned the service, the petitioner would not be entitled to family pension and T.I. thereon. The opp.parties have further pleaded that in view of such position, the reliefs claimed by the petitioner should not be granted and there is no illegality or arbitrariness in the order of the District Inspector of Schools which has been impugned in the present writ petition.