SHANTI DEVI Vs. R.S.R.T.C.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties. The short question involved in the instant writ application is whether the petitioner is entitled to opt for family pension from the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation', for short) or from the Central Government/Indian Army, of which the petitioner is in receipt of?

(2.) DURING the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner expressed his willingness to withdraw the writ application and make a comprehensive representation to the respondent -Corporation, in order to stake her claim for opting family pension under Rule 64 and/or 65 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules of 1996', for short), in order to have the pension from the respondent -Corporation, where her husband served for 24 years.

(3.) THE petitioner seeks liberty to make a detailed and comprehensive representation with regard to her grievance and to exercise the option for claiming family pension from the respondent -Corporation, giving up the family pension, she is in receipt of from the Central Government/Indian Army. She wants to do so since the duration of service of her late husband was very short with the Indian Army whereas in the respondent -Corporation her husband served for 24 years.