High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt B J Kasthuri vs The Chief Post Master General on 6 June, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Smt B J Kasthuri vs The Chief Post Master General on 6 June, 2008
Author: L.Narayana Swamy


EN TEE 3:33 coca? or KARNAEAKA AT BARe$;§Rg
mamas THIS was 6*” may 0? JUNE: é§§é* ?~ *

PRE3$h’l.E__ H 1′

THE HG§’BEE MR. Jusricg §’§A§£§AR§ $fi§M¥%j
WRIT Pzrzwzou.Na,;2aé2f2oo7;§$ggg$;:3’V ‘

Barwfian: 2″ x R I ‘

1 am? 3 J KASEHERI5 ,_ , ‘.

W76 LATE.S. §AamAHA3x&x’;g_’a
gag 45 YEARS “._ j ; =%.’»=
gfa L»§3; 6%K”ca§ssHg«. ,
MfiGABI}RGAD”_ ;~* “~A<i»-W.

BAR§%LGR£é23 _*_ – ‘V .

% j> “‘a .”Ca * yzwxwzsnsz

(By 3×1 3 v fiARAs:Mxax}”§§v., )

ulonivwwwvnuw 1

,1. T3z”cHxE§ PGST MASTER GEHERES
.3 ‘{Pos£A3.L;:E xmsnagxcsg
‘ifKAE§A£AKa CiRCLE, G?0 BUILING
_ B$§GALQREm$1

‘r_2 “$33 ESSXSTANT EIVISIOHEL MRKAGER(PLI)

‘ Kaaamgxa CIRCLE
g3Aw3ALaR£~e1

J. .V . A2 .. RE5PGRDEHT$

§¥&é€_éH_ Ufl?,Qg§a {By Sr; A§£¥E§£AwKH% goa R: 5 R2 }

éEQ1u”V:&EL;, .§-° ‘A @313 W.P. FILES yaayzxs we 9:233? 232
=/v@fi€>e *4-.V FRES90 guys $9 EA? 232 awrxxm amgvam nag amaax

W

_2.

903233 ET. 22.3.3993, QAKEE E? TEE ?E?£$$QNER’$
KUSfiA§E LA§E. $.§AflM£§AEfi&§ FRQM THE R£SPQRDENTS,
WXT§ §LL C$§SEQ§EfiTEA EEEFITS ARE E§T$RESI Gfi
TEE SQED éfiQUET, EQ ?EE EETIIIOKERV ‘V ‘f,U

tags @2322? ?E’£’ITI€}N C0_2fiI1$_¥G e%r_:”’52*ié;’E:;:zr§§:vz’;;2=$L15’%’:. _
agmgz-1% 3 was? 215315 my, ‘$35 CQURT’-_V§§ADE ‘*:*:«;§:__ ‘

?§L§QWI§§§ ”

.Tg§g§§ ,

fizaa petitioner iviias sought
far a di$rectiea.’.*g.f,f:f._v2:”‘1:gi’__ $jc_$>.:§V~:*x=s:-»n5:i§%-‘;.§.”s;$_.??;;~94.’§ wzype-33.55;
&a*te& 22:.»*3;«’~:§90 :=.’t3I§a%;: ‘$gf 1’i:es}…T.5huszaand. The sum
a.sas,;zre<§."V §:§li.cy was Rs.20,GGQ/-.
Acgvbfdifilgfvi, ::f:'§fti12eT"~ §:'e%';it*;#:f;"<$ii£%.;'.f, ha: husband died on
dase 3f the petitianer that

the réxsggérxdefi-?:§'._V1ia2¥e% zmt: paié the amount deductad

Vuézdgg gm é::i¢;i____;pr.aiiay.

=R;§e_%.5por:c1ents have fileai statexmnt sf

" ,¢}éje§%tit§f;I:% stating' that the palicy which was

%'.a}t:<:é:ni. by the husband at' the patitianer was

$:*:;zrren§ered hy him on 2%-3.—~§.§§é arm the azmavunt

has been paid. acc<::rd.i.ngiy. Thereaftar no

"Y

éedaction has been made. in zespect_ cf the

ccntentian of the petiticner that ~a»fim¢mthly

éefinctiaa ef Rs.?$i– has been mafia :§£6fiT=ihe
saary of the husband frag l$94 gii:=%;é*d§atn"in *

fiavember 2900, it :s\_ gumfiiitéaj' £hét %;:he '

petitioner has net §réducedt&n§ dmc¢&ntHt¢ prave

the deduation.

3% In the iightflgfftfieféabmassion Kde by

the partieag I ha§é’§&fieEthr¢u§E the material an

rea@r§,-*~’5

4.*§£’E§vfi§tV&fi$§#£@é that the petiti@ner’s
husbaafi §ag “tak§fi, a! policy far a sum af
Rs.2§,§GQf¥; fi$a% t$é said p$li§y wag surranfiereé

oa*a24-1%;§§4~”a5a ‘that the petitianer’$ husbaa
~ ‘ 5’ ‘ ‘ 55,;-.4 I /tw-ZQQO

“4eg§:raa sii[£s;§§m19§§, In the light sf this

A:eca¥$ryjT

*_§g¢;$§§;¢g .a¢tg and in the light of the premium

aertificate bearing Ra.

A3€S{CfiE§Efi1f53?ffi4~G§/§? fiatea ?~1e»2ee5 issuaa

“. §§.the mepartmafit sf Telecomunicatian, there i3

._.’Y&’E C.o”nse.n!1J VH2 (:.cur*si* OTJM (‘[1-53°’ ‘0-7-1903.

4 ,

“\

-4″

na need to égabt the ciamm mad ,§y the
patitianer.

E. fieace Z gags tha fallewing Qz$e$}?fi*:*

?hi5 writ petitiafl :s_a;;oweaQ”=C”

Ehé gaspgndent is dize&€ed{“fi$ §$¥V ?fié a§&;icyH>”

amomnt deducted firam. £ha Vsa;éry WW0§ fiha
§etitianer’s husband t$ %§@_pe£it%§$@r as pex the
premium A? _;e¢§§§§§, fi”._ ANéartificate
No.An¢s{cm/ea§;;5g§;§g§§$f§7v K§§tea 7«1e»2ea5
issmed @¥ @§§e i3é?%§tfi%§£ =$f? Telecommnnicatien
within5#v§$%i5§ §ff%#5.§§fifihs§

Sd/-3__
Judge