Laxmi Bai vs Union of India - 2011 Supreme(SC) 34

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2011 Supreme(SC) 34

2011 (1) Supreme 319
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dalveer Bhandari and Deepak Verma, JJ.
Laxmi Bai — Appellant(s)
versus
Union of India & Anr. — Respondent(s)
Civil Appeal No. 432 of 2011
(@ Special Leave Petition(C)No.7119 of 2006)
Decided on : 10-1-2011

Headnote:Service Law – Retiral benefits – Incumbent employee regularized before death – appellant entitled to all consequential retiral benefits including family pension. (Para 4)
       Facts of the case:
        1. Appellant’s husband regularized in 1972 and died in 1975.
        2. Retiral benefits denied on ground of non-regularisation as per screening in 1977.
        3. CAT allowing the petition while High Court reversed it.
       Finding of the Court:
        Incumbent employee was regularized before his death.
       Result : Appeal disposed of.

ORDER

Leave granted.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Solicitor General of India.

3. This appeal emanates from the judgment and order dated 12.3.2004 of the Rajasthan High Court delivered in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2282 of 1998. By the impugned judgment, the High Court has reversed the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the husband of the appellant-Chauthmal was regularized in service vide order dated 8.5.1972. Once he was regularized in the year 1972 then the question of his getting screened for regularization in the year 1977 did not arise. In this case the husband of the appellant admittedly died in 1975 but before that he was regularized. In this view of the matter, the impugned judgment of the High Court cannot be sustained. Consequently, the appellant would be entitled to all consequential benefits, including family pension.

5. We direct the respondents to ensure that the outstanding payment, including the family pension is granted to the appellant within three months.

6. This appeal is, accordingly, disposed of, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

***********

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2011 Supreme(SC) 34

2011 (1) Supreme 319SUPREME COURT OF INDIADalveer Bhandari and Deepak Verma, JJ. Laxmi Bai — Appellant(s)versusUnion of India & Anr. — Respondent(s)Civil Appeal No. 432 of 2011(@ Special Leave Petition(C)No.7119 of 2006)Decided on : 10-1-2011

2011 (1) Supreme 319
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dalveer Bhandari and Deepak Verma, JJ.
Laxmi Bai — Appellant(s)
versus
Union of India & Anr. — Respondent(s)
Civil Appeal No. 432 of 2011
(@ Special Leave Petition(C)No.7119 of 2006)
Decided on : 10-1-2011