Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J.
Koripelli Krishna Murthy - Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh - Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO.1348 OF 2021
Decided On : 16-03-2021
Constitution of India, 1950 – Articles 300, 226, 14, 16, 21 and 309 – A P Revised Pensionary Rules 1980 – Rule 50 – Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 120, 302 – Pensionary Benefits – Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the relief to issue Writ of Mandamus to declaring the impugned proceedings in RC of the respondent rejected the claim of the petitioner to sanction and grant the death and Pensionary Benefits as wholly dependent on his diseased son due to not produced any evidence to show he was wholly dependent as illegal arbitrary and contrary to the Rule 50 of A P Revised Pensionary Rules 1980 and violative of the Articles 14, 16, 21 and 309 of the constitution of India and set aside the same and consequentially direct the respondents to sanction and grant and release the death and Pensionary Benefits including applicable benefits if any in favour of petitioner as wholly dependent on his diseased son who died on 18.12.2014
Finding of court: Deceased government servant was not the claimant, but his father was the claimant and that, no disciplinary proceedings were culminated into penalty against the deceased thereby question of imposing penalty against the deceased does not arise, therefore, no penalty was imposed against Srinivasa Chowdary during his lifetime. – Consequently, in the absence penalty imposed against the deceased government servant, the benefits payable to the deceased employee which are stated above shall be released except family pension, which is in question. – Hence, withholding of death benefits payable consequent upon death of the government servant, except family pension is a grave illegality and it amounts to depriving the petitioner from enjoying the property, which is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, as held by the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court in Mohinder Singh Gill v. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi – Non-payment of pension, if not authorized by law, is violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and awarded interest 12% per annum on the deferred pension. – The matter was carried to Supreme Court by way of Special Leave to Appeal (c), wherein the Apex Court while affirming the order of the Division Bench of this Court, scaled down the interest from 12% to 6%. – Therefore, based on the judgment of the Apex Court in the judgment referred supra, interest at the rate of 6% on the arrears of benefits payable to the petitioner is hereby awarded.
Result: Writ Petition Allowed
ORDER :
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
The factual matrix of the case is as follows:
One K.V.V. Srinivasa Chowdary @ Srinu (hereinafter referred as ‘Srinivasa Chowdary’) was appointed as Constable, P.C.No.988 in Andhra Pradesh Special Protection Force (for short ‘APSPF’) in the year 1994 and later, he was promoted as Head Constable in the year 2000 under the control of Commandant, Special Protection Force, Vijayawada/Respondent No.4. Srinivasa Chowdary died on 18.12.2014.
While the petitioner’s son was working as Head Constable at the A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad, he was allegedly implicated in a false Criminal Case in Crime No.139 of 2006 for the offences punishable under Section 302 I.P.C on the file of II Town Police Station, Kakinada, East Godavari. He was arrested on 26.07.2006 and remanded to judicial custody. Later, the authorities conducted a departmental enquiry without waiting till completion of criminal case, the authorities took a decision on the enquiry report and proposed to remove Srinivasa Chowdary from service.
Sessions Case No.184 of 2008 on the file of IV Additional District Judge, East Godavari District, was ended in acquittal vide calendar and judgment dated 08.03.2010. It is contended that, after acquittal, Srinivasa Chowdary has to be reinstated into service, but, unfortunately the petitioner’s son -Srinivasa Chowdary died on 18.12.2014.
Though the petitioner made several representations to the concerned authorities to grant pensionary benefits to him, as he is dependant and also senior citizen, consequent upon death of his son -Srinivasa Chowdary, he received no response from the authorities. As there is no response from the authorities, the petitioner approached National Human Rights Commission at New Delhi vide Case No.1860/1/5/2020 dated 20.11.2020, then the third respondent passed the impugned order stating that even though as per Rule 50 of the Andhra Pradesh Revised Pension Rules, 1980 (for short ‘the Rules’) the parents who are only dependant on the government servant when he/she was alive, provided the deceased employee left behind neither a widow nor child shall only be eligible for pensionary benefits. But, the fourth respondent/Commandant, APSPF rejected the claim of this petitioner as he did not produce any evidence to show that the petitioner was wholly dependant on his deceased son when he was alive and the fourth respondent did not sanction pensionary benefits to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition for sanction and release the pensionary benefits of his deceased son -Srinivasa Chowdary.
The fourth respondent/Commandant, APSPF filed counter, denying material allegations made in the petition, while admitting appointment of Srinivasa Chowdary as Constable in APSPF, his involvement in Crime No.139 of 2006 for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B and 302 I.P.C on the file of II Town Police Station, Kakinada and initiation of proceedings against this petitioner by the disciplinary authority/Respondent No.4, as he was unauthorizedly absent from duties with effect from 11.07.2006, his arrest in connection with the above crime, placing Srinivasa C
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
