SMT. GITA DEVI Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the parties.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that Radha Krishna Bhagat had earlier married to Lila Devi who died on 18.8.1988. After her death, Radha Krishna Bhagat married this Petitioner on 11.11.1988. Unfortunately, the Petitioner's husband died in harness while he was posted as Executive Magistrate, Dumka on 31.7.1991. Thereupon, sanction order was passed on 15.2.1993 for payment of family pension and gratuity to the Petitioner being widow of the deceased employee. However, that order was cancelled and a fresh order was passed on 30.11.1996 sanctioning payment of 50% of pension to the Petitioner and rest of 50% to the children of first wife with a stipulation that as soon as the children of first wife would attain age of majority, the amount of family pension would be paid to this Petitioner in addition to what she was getting family pension to the extent of 50%. When the children of first wife attained majority, this Petitioner made representation before the Treasury Officer, Dumka for making payment of the amount of full family pension. The Treasury Officer, Dumka on 18.7.2002 wrote a letter to the Accountant General seeking direction in the matter relating to payment of full pension to the Petitioner. The Accountant General in turn wrote to the concerned department as well as the Finance Department to take a decision in the matter and to communicate it to the Petitioner under intimation to Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department. In response to that, a decision was taken by the Department of Finance, as contained in Letter No. 4638 dated 17.11.2003 (Annexure -4), whereby it was communicate to the office of the Accountant General that after attainment of age of majority of the children of first wife, the amount of family pension, which was being paid to the children of first wife, gets ceased in view of note appended to Clause 7 (III) of Memo No. 9505 dated 3.9.1964 issued by the Department of Finance and as such, it is not transferable to the surviving widow -Petitioner. Subsequently, the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms vide its Letter No. 5936 dated 21.7.2004 (Annexure -6/A) also communicated its decision of the same effect to the Accountant General who in turn vide its Memo No. PEN -2 -3499 dated 9/14.1.2004 (Annexure -5) and Letter No. PEN -2 -2940 dated 19.10.2004 (Annexure -6) communicated to the concerned Treasury Officer. The said orders, as contained in Annexures -4, 5 and 6, have been sought to be quashed.

(3.) I do find substance in the submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner.