SHAMA NAGPAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court praying for quashing of order dated 05.08.2004 (Anneuxre P-4), vide which the claim of the petitioner was rejected for grant of family pension on the ground that her claim was not covered by the provisions contained in Chapter 9 of the Civil Services Rules Volume-II read with Appendix-I of the Rules. Challenge has also been raised to the order dated 29.04.2010 (Annexure P-9), which is in response to the legal notice served by the petitioner claiming the benefit of family pension.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner contends that earlier the claim which has been rejected by the respondents, for grant of family pension was based on the unamended Rules, according to which, the petitioner could not have been held entitled to the grant of family pension as she was not eligible under the said Rules specifically, however, now coming into force of the Punjab Civil Services Volume II (Haryana Amendment) Rules, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as Rules, 2008), an unmarried daughter has been held entitled to be eligible for grant of family pension. He, on this basis, contends that the claim of the petitioner deserves to be now considered in the light of these amended Rules and a direction to this effect be issued to the respondents.

(3.) Counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that the father of the petitioner expired on 15.08.2003. Her mother had earlier expired on 23.01.2003 i.e. prior to the death of her father and, therefore, she was the only person who could have claimed the benefit of family pension, which, as per the unamended Rules, she was not entitled to and, therefore, her claim stood rejected. The cause of action arose to the petitioner on 15.08.2003 and the Rules prevalent then, would be applicable to the claim of the petitioner, which claim was, as a matter of fact, considered and rejected by the impugned orders. He, on this basis, further submits that now the claim based on the amended Rules would not be applicable to the petitioner as her claim stands already decided by the respondents at the relevant time as per the Rules applicable then. He, therefore, prays for dismissal of the present writ petition.