DHAPU Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is the mother of deceased employee Vishnu Kant, seeks family pension in the instant writ petition.

(2.) CONTEXTUAL facts depict that late son of the petitioner Shri Vishnu Kant was appointed as Class-IV employee (Jaldhari) vide order dated February 25, 9185. While he was in service he died on November 3, 1995. At the time of his death he was posted in Animal Husbandry Department, Bada Khera Ajmer. The deceased was Bachelor and ided leaving behind his mother Dhapu Bai (petitioner) as the only legal representative. The petitioner approached respondents to grant family pension but no justice was done to her. When for a long time family pension was not granted, the petitioner made representation on July 31, 2002, which was returned with the endorsement the petitioner did not fall within the definition of family/dependent thus was not entitled to family pension. The Deputy Director however vide letter dated February 14, 2002 asked the petitioner to submit succession certificate. The petitioner claims that exclusion of dependent mother in view of Rule 286d (old rule) is irrational and without any basis and seeks to quash the communication dated February 14, 2002.

(3.) THE petitioner, who undeniably is the mother of deceased employee Vishnu Kant, can not be asked to submit succession certificate in order to grant family pension to her.