SATYA DEVI Vs. STATE OF J&K AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Case set up by the petitioner is that her husband, namely Deewan Chand was appointed in the respondent Industries Department in the year 1954. On reaching superannuation has retired on 27.11.1978 from Modern Rosin Turpentine Factory, Miran Sahib, Jammu.

(2.) In the petition, petitioner has prayed for a direction in the name of respondents so as to command them to release all benefits of her husband including arrears, pension, gratuity, G.P. Fund and consequential benefits of service with 18% interest from the due date of payment.

(3.) In the reply as filed by respondents No. 2 to 4 it is stated in para 9 that the husband of the petitioner retired in the year 1978 received retiral claims under J &K Industries Employees Service Rules. The position as was then was neither challenged by the husband of the petitioner nor was he party in the appeals as decided by the Honourable Apex Court on 27.02.2002. In the reply it is further stated that the employees of the J &K Industries Ltd. cannot claim benefits because J &K Industries Ltd. is not a State within the meaning of Art. 12 of the Constitution of India.