VIDYA SADOTRA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a widow. Her husband was an employee of the respondent -State. He was engaged as a driver. He retired in 1974. He has since died. He died on 6th of November 1990. The petitioner submits that as widow, she is entitled to pensionary benefits which accured in favour of her husband.

(2.) FACTS are as under: The petitioner was to superannuate on 19th of November 1972. He was actually retired on 16.2.1974. This retention of the husband of the petitioner in service beyond 19th of November 1972 was regularised. An order came to be passed in this regard on 4th of February 1978. It is thus stated that in terms of SRO 31 dated 20th of January 1972, the husband of the petitioner acquired a permanent status. It is on this basis, claim has been made to the pensionary benefits.

(3.) OBJECTIONS have been preferred by the Accountant General for the State of J&K. It i; stated that regularisation of service beyond the date of superannuation was not in accordance with the law. The basis of rejection of the claim of pension is that the petitionerâ„¢s husband didnot fulfil the requisite period of service which would have enabled him to get pension. It is further stated that a work charged employee is not entitled to any pensionary benefits.