1
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2563/2007
SMT. GANGA KANWAR
VS.
STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.
DATE OF ORDER : 07.10.2009.
HON'BLE MR. GOVIND MATHUR, J.
Mr. Girish Joshi for the petitioner.
Mr. K.R. Sahran for the respondents.
By this petition for writ, a direction is sought by the
petitioner for respondents to allow her family pension being
widow of late Shri Bheru Singh, who died on 02.07.1985 while in
services of respondent Irrigation Department.
Facts necessary to be noticed are that late Shri Bheru
Singh – husband of the petitioner entered in the services of the
respondents as a work charge employee on 08.03.1969. Semi
Permanent Status and Permanent Status were conferred to him
on 28.03.1971 and 27.09.1979 respectively. After death of Shri
Bheru Singh on 02.07.1985, appointment was given to his son
Shri Bhanwar Singh on compassionate grounds and a payment in
tune of Rs.3092.50 was made to the petitioner against
Contributory Provident Fund. By an application dated nil
(Annexure 2), son of the present petitioner claimed family
pension for his mother and that was forwarded to the competent
authority i.e. The Assistant Director, State Insurance-cum-
Provident Fund Department, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
The Assistant Director, State Insurance-cum-Provident Fund
2
Department, Jaipur vide letter dated 25.10.1993, instructed the
Assistant Engineer, IGNP, District Sub Division I, Mahajan,
Bikaner that pension can be given to the present petitioner, if
she deposits State Government’s contribution relating to
Provident Fund. The petitioner accordingly deposited a sum of
Rs.1,458/- vide receipt No.C 000065/211664 dated 15.03.1995.
The petitioner also completed all necessary formalities for the
grant of family pension and she also opted for pension. A
decision was also taken by the respondents to allow her pension,
however, subsequent thereto, the Joint Director, Department of
Pension and Pensioners Welfare, Bikaner vide letter Annexure 12
conveyed that in light of the communication dated 23.01.2006
from the office of the Dy. Secretary to the Government of
Rajasthan, Department of Finance (Revenue), the pension case
already settled earlier cannot be reopened. By an another
communication dated 31.10.2006, it was also communicated to
the petitioner that Shri Bheru Singh died on 02.07.1985 and as
such the Circular dated 01.10.1986 relating to grant of pension
after completion of 10 years of service and opting for pension at
subsequent stage was not applicable to him. In the
circumstances above, this petition for writ is preferred.
In reply to the writ petition, sole contention of the
respondents is that husband of the petitioner was a member of
Contributory Provident Fund Scheme, as such he was not entitled
for any pensionary benefits and for the same reason no family
pension can be given to the present petitioner.
3
Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the
rival contentions.
It is not in dispute that husband of the petitioner late Shri
Bheru Singh entered in services of the respondents as a work
charge employee on 08.03.1969 and Permanent Status was
confirmed to him on 27.09.1979. Shri Bheru Singh died on
02.07.1985 i.e. after completing services for a term of more
than 15 years. True it is, no option was given by Shri Bheru
Singh for accepting pension in his life time as at that time, no
opportunity in this regard was available to him. It is the position
admitted that after death of Shri Bheru Singh, the present
petitioner submitted an option form in prescribed proforma for
pension and that was as per the instructions given by the
Assistant Director, State Insurance-cum-Provident Fund
Department. The petitioner also deposited the State
Government’s contribution as per the directions given by the
competent authority for receiving family pension. In such
circumstances, there was no occasion for denying family pension
to the petitioner. So far as the Circular dated 04.09.2006
(Annexure 13) is concerned, it certainly refers for grant of
pension to the persons, who have completed 10 years of service
on opting the same and admittedly no option was submitted by
Shri Bheru Singh before his death. As a matter of fact, there was
no opportunity available to him to do so, as the circular in this
regard was issued after his death. In such circumstances, the
opportunity to opt for pension was availed by the present
petitioner and once she was permitted to opt for pension, there
4
was no ground available to the respondents to deny family
pension to her. the petitioner. Beside, this Court in the case of
Sujan Singh vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 1991 WLR(s) 340
held that an employee declared permanent under the Rajasthan
“Work Charged Rules, 1964 is to be treated as a regular
Government servant and is entitled for all benefits for which a
regular Government servant is entitled. In view of the law laid
down by this Court in the case of Sujan Singh (supra), the
petitioner’s husand is to be treated as Permanent government
servant and on that count too, she is to be treated as a widow of
regular government servant and, therefore, entitled for
pensionary benefits as available to other regular government
servants.
Accordingly, this petition for writ is allowed. The
respondents are directed to accept the petitioner’s case for grant
of family pension from the date of death of her husband late Shri
Bheru Singh. The pensionary benefits accorded to the petitioner
as a consequent to the directions above are to be applied and
given to her within a period of three months from today, failing
to which the petitioner shall further be entitled for interest @
8.5% per annum on the amount due.
No order to cost.
(GOVIND MATHUR)J.
Anil/