LEELA DEVI Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petition has been filed on the following prayers vide para No. 7 (i) and (iii):

(2.) IN reply, Respondents No. 1 and 3 have taken the following stand vide para 6.4: 6.4. In regard to averments made in this para the factual position is that the application of Smt. Leela Devi w/o late Sh. Mast Ram Chauhan, for family pension was sent to the Sr. Dy. Accountant General (A&E) H.P. Shimla -3, vide letter No. Karmik (Lekha) B (3) Misc -1/99 -I, dated 29.9.1999 (copy annexed as Annexure R/2) to O.A. The Sr. Dy. Accountant General (A&E) H.P. Shimla intimated vide their letter No. Pen -1/M -15/70 - 71/10853 -54 dated 6.1.2000 (copy annexed as Annexure R/3) to the O.A. that as per pension case file of the retiree there is no mention of name of Smt. Leela Devi, as wife of Sh. Mast Ram Chauhan and at the time of his retirement the pension case of late Sh. Mast Ram Chauhan was decided by the A.G. Central Revenue, New Delhi and his PPO was issued by their office and the name of Smt. Damyanti Devi was recorded as his wife who was also authorized family pension vide PPO No. 710/HP and subsequent PPO No. 2746/HP (copy annexed as Annexure R/1) to O.A. It was also intimated that Smt. Leela Devi had claimed family pension after the death of Smt. Damyanti Devi only which she did not claim immediately after the death of Sh. Mast Ram Chauhan i.e. June, 1976 onward and as per certificate issued by the Gram Panchayat Vikas Adhikari, the marriage of Smt. Leela Devi was solemnized before the year 1954 but the retiree never indicated her name as his wife. They further stated that before authorizing family pension the genuineness of claim/documents produced by the claimant may be got examined to avoid any fraud payment. Accordingly Smt. Leela Devi was requested vide letter No. Karmik (Lekha) B(3) Misc -1/99 -II dated 7.2.2000 (copy annexed at Annexure R/4 to O.A.) to send requisite documents for examining the genuineness of the claim and also intimate the reasons for not staking claim for family pension immediately after the death of Sh. Mast Ram Chauhan. The reply of this letter is still awaited.

(3.) IN view of the above reply, in case the Petitioner still has any surviving grievance, she may make a representation along with a copy of this judgment to the Respondents/competent authority within a month from today who shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law within next two months after affording an opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner, if so desired.