1. Compassionate appointment of widow — Remarriage and neglect of dependent children — Dispute over family pension and salary deduction for children's maintenance. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
2017 Supreme(SC) 1729
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
MADAN B. LOKUR, DEEPAK GUPTA, JJ.
SMT. PREMLATA ACHARYA - Petitioner
Versus
SUMAN ACHARYA & ORS - Respondent
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).16315 of 2017
Decided on : 28-07-2017
Important Points
The welfare of the deceased government servant's children is a key consideration in compassionate appointment and family pension cases, and the court may interpret relevant rules to ensure their sustenance.
Subject
Family Law - Pension and Support
Act Referred
FAMILY PENSION RULES: .
RAJASTHAN COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT OF DEPENDENTS OF DECEASED GOVERNMENT SERVANTS RULES: .
RAJASTHAN COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT OF DEPENDENTS OF DECEASED GOVERNMENT SERVANTS RULES: .
Headnote
Compassionate Appointment - Family Pension - The court directed that the family pension due to the widow be given to the maternal grandfather for the benefit of her children as per the relevant rules and 50% of her salary should continue to be paid for the children until the last of them attains the age of 25 years.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a widow who was given compassionate appointment on the death of her husband, remarried and left her children under the care of her father. The High Court directed that the family pension due to her be given to the maternal grandfather for the benefit of her children as well as 50% of her salary.
Finding of the Court:
The court, after considering the relevant rules and the circumstances of the case, directed that the family pension should continue to be paid to the grandfather of the children for the benefit of the children as per the Rules and 50% of the salary of the petitioner should continue to be paid for the children until the last of them attains the age of 25 years.
Issues: Compassionate appointment, entitlement to family pension upon remarriage, sustenance of children after remarriage.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the relevant Family Pension Rules and the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependants of Deceased Government Servants Rule, 1996 to ensure the welfare of the deceased government servant's children after the widow's remarriage.
Final Decision: The court directed that the family pension should continue to be paid to the grandfather of the children for the benefit of the children as per the Rules and 50% of the salary of the petitioner should continue to be paid for the children until the last of them attains the age of 25 years.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Dushyant Dave, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Priyanka Gladson, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Kumar Kartikay, Adv. Ms. Neelu Sharma, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Singh Dhillon, Adv. Mr. Vishal, Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Dushyant Dave, Sr. Adv. (A.C.) Ms. Priyanka Gladson, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Kumar Kartikay, Adv. Ms. Neelu Sharma, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Singh Dhillon, Adv. Mr. Vishal, Adv. Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR
Table of Contents
2. Challenge to High Court directions regarding payment of family pension to maternal grandfather and deduction of salary for children's sustenance. (Para 2 )
3. Remarried widows lose family pension eligibility; compassionate appointment requires maintaining dependent family members, and failure to do so justifies salary deductions or termination. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 )
4. Compassionate appointees must maintain dependent family members; failure to do so justifies salary deductions for sustenance to prevent termination of appointment. (Para 5 , 6 , 8 )
5. Family pension to be paid to the children's grandfather and 50% of the petitioner's salary to be paid for children until age 25. (Para 8 , 9 )
6. What is the effect of remarriage on a widow's entitlement to family pension?
Under the applicable Family Pension Rules, a widow who remarries is no longer entitled to receive the family pension. (Para 4 )
7. What are the obligations of a person appointed on compassionate grounds regarding dependent family members?
A person appointed on compassionate grounds is required to properly maintain other family members who were dependent on the deceased government servant, typically by furnishing a written undertaking to that effect. (Para 5 )
8. What are the legal consequences if a compassionate appointee fails to maintain dependent family members?
If it is proved that dependent family members are being neglected, the appointing authority may terminate the appointment after providing an opportunity to be heard. Alternatively, the court may direct salary deductions for the dependents' sustenance. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 )
ORDER :
1. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned amicus curiae.
2. The petitioner was given compassionate appointment on the death of her husband. She has now remarried and left her children under the care of her father, the maternal grandfather of the children. The High Court directed that the family pension due to her be given to the maternal grandfather for the benefit of her children as also 50% of her salary. Hence the present petition.
3. Learned amicus curiae assisting us on the legal issues has placed before us the relevant extracts of the Family Pension Rules as applicable to the Government of Rajasthan.
4. A perusal of the Rules indicates that in the event the widow gets remarried, she will not be entitled to family pension. In the present case, the widow upon remarriage and obtaining compassionate appointment left her five children to the care of her father. Under the circumstances, the High Court, on an interpretation of the Rules, came to the conclusion that it would be appropriate if the family pension is given to the maternal grandfather of the children so that the children can be looked after.
5. Our attention has also been drawn to the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependants of Deceased Government Servants Rule, 1996, which reads as follows:
“Appointment subject to certain conditions.-2
[1] When a government Servant dies while in service one of his/her dependants may be considered for appointment in Government Service subject to the condition that employment under these rules shall not be admissible in cases where the spouse or at least one of the sons, unmarried daughters, adopted son/adopted unmarried daughter of the deceased Government servant is already employed on regular basis under the Central/any State Government or Statutory Board, Organisation/Corporation owned or controlled wholly or partially by the Central/ any State Government at the time of death of the Government Servant.
Provided that this condition shall not apply where the widow seeks employment for herself.
[2] Appointment under these rules shall be given on the condition that the person appointed on compassionate ground shall maintain properly the other family members who were dependant on the deceased Government servant and on furnishing an undertaking in writing that he/she shall maintain properly the other family members who were dependant on the deceased Government servant. If subsequently, at any time, it is proved that such dependant family members are being neglected or are not being maintained properly by him, the appointment may be terminated by the Appointing Authority after providing an opportunity to the compassionate appointees by way issue of show-cause notice asking him to explain why his services should not be terminated.”
6. A perusal of the aforesaid Rule indicates that the compassionate appointment of the petitioner could in fact have been terminated, but instead of doing so, the High Court found it appropriate to direct that 50% of her salary should be paid over to her children for their sustenance.
7. A similar view was expressed by a learned Single Judge of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court in Rehana Azeem Vs. State and Ors. [2007 (2) JKJ 575]. Paragraph 5 of the Report reads as follows:
“5. On consideration I find that perhaps there was no alternative available to the authorities other than directing deductions of 50% of petitioner's salary for payment to respondents 8 and 9 who admittedly are widow and minor child of deceased employee and as such duly entitled to be maintained from out of the salary of petitioner that she gets in lieu of her appointment essentially ordered for maintaining her and the respondents. That the petitioner has given up such maintenance simply speaks of callousness which she should not have exhibited particularly in case of the minor son of her deceased brother who has a long way to go before he gets anywhere near self sustenance.”
8. Under the circumstances, after hearin
