SATYA DEVI Vs. STATE OF H. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioner, is, a widow of deceased Jagat Ram, whereupon whom, work charge status was conferred, on 1.1.2002. However, the demise of late Jagat Ram happened, on 17th March, 2007. Upon, his demise the petitioner, claims the benefit of family pension, yet the afore espousal, of, the petitioner, became denied to her. Consequently, the writ petitioner, through, the extant writ petition, asks, for, a mandamus being made, upon, the respondents, for, hers therefrom, becoming, granted family pension along with all incidental thereto benefits.

(2.) Though, the respondents contested, the availability, of, the afore benefit to the petitioner, and, the afore contest becomes rested, upon, the factum, vis-a-vis, the deceased Jagat Ram, upon, his completing 12 years of service, hence, his superannuating on 30.06.2016, (i) and, thereupon, the bestowings, of, the benefit(s), of Rule 54 of the CCS Pension Rules, either upon him or upon, his surviving spouse, rather becoming unvindicable. The afore contest can be rested, only, upon a perusal of Rule 54, of, the CCS Pension Rules, the relevant sub-rule (2) (i) whereof, becomes extracted hereinafter:-

(3.) For the foregoing reasons, the extant petition, is, allowed, and, the respondents are directed, to, disburse family pension to the petitioner, in, terms of sub-rule (2) (iii) of Rule 54 of the CCS Pension Rules along with all other incidental thereto benefits. All pending applications also stand disposed of.