LICHHAMI DEVI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS herein are old parents of one Joginder Singh who was working in Haryana Roadways as a conductor. He was initially appointed for 89 days on 25.1.1994 in Chandigarh Depot and was subsequently transferred to Haryana Roadways Kaithal Depot. Unfortunately Joginder Singh died on 22.5.1999. Both the petitioners were fully dependent upon their son -Joginder Singh. After his death, petitioner No. 2 applied for family pension but the same was neither sanctioned nor paid to him and therefore, present writ petition was filed.

(2.) UPON notice of the petition, respondents No. I to 3 in their written statement, stated that petitioners are not entitled to family pension because as per Family Pension Scheme, parents are not included in the category of relatives of deceased who are entitled to family pension. They have further submitted that Joginder Singh had only 8 months and 14 days qualifying service whereas for being entitled to family pension, the employee concerned must have one year's continuing/qualifying service.

(3.) IN regard to the objection that Joginder Singh had not put in one year's qualifying service, counsel for the petitioners has placed on record, order 591/E.A dated 14.3.2001 of General Manager, Haryana Roadways, Chandigarh whereby as per direction given in CWP No. 10870 of 2000 titled Gurjant Singh and Ors. Drivers, Haryana Roadways, Chandigarh v. State of Haryana and CWP No. 12697 of 1999 services of those Drivers and Conductors who were appointed on adhoc basis and had completed 2 years service, had been regularized . Services of Joginder Singh had been regularised with effect from 25.1.1996 meaning thereby that on the date of death i,e. 22.5.1999, Joginder Singh had put in more than one year's regular continuing service. Accordingly, second objection for denying family pension to the petitioner, too is not sustainable.