SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(SC) 550

UMESH C.BANERJEE, G.B.PATTANAIK
G. L. Bhatia – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The sole question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the appellant, who happens to be the husband of the deceased government servant, is entitled to family pension under the provisions of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules (for short "the rules") notwithstanding the fact that the deceased wife in her nomination did not include the husband. The forums below have taken the view agreeing with the authorities that since the nomination was not in favour of the husband and the husband was staying separate from the wife, the husband would not be entitled to family pension in question. This view cannot be sustained in view of the provisions contained in Rule 54 of the rules. It is too well settled that where rights of the parties are governed by statutory provisions, the individual nomination contrary to the statute will not operate.

3. Under Rule 54 sub-rule (14)(b)(i) the expression "family" has been defined thus:

"54. (14)(b)(i) Wife in the case of a male government servant, or husband in the case of a female government servant...."

4. Sub-rule (8)(ii) of Rule 54 states that:

"54. (8)(ii) If a deceased government servant or pensioner lea



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top