Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
HARISH KUMAR, J.
CWJC No. 9735 of 2021
(11.1.2023)
Kaushlya Devi ... Petitioner
vs.
State of Bihar & Ors. ... Respondents
Service Law – Death-cum-Retiral Benefits – Civil death of employee – To receive post retiral benefit is a right of service which comes inherent with service – Real test to determine is whether a parallel right is created in favour of others, as a result of lapse of time and test is not physical running of time – Petitioner's husband remained trace less for seven years – No law of limitation applies to be given pension which is not a bounty – To receive post retiral benefit is a continuing right and it cannot be curtailed on account of delay and laches as respondent State being a model employer is duty bound to ensure payment of post retiral benefits/family pension to its employees, which he/she earned on account of his/her unblemished sincere service rendered to State – Even, if it is decided that employee does not belong to SC/ST that cannot invalidate appointment unilaterally – Respondent directed to ensure payment of all admissible death-cum-retiral outstanding dues to petitioner with effect from date on which erstwhile employee declared civil death along with admissible statutory interest. (Paras 10, 14, 17, 18 and 19)
Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 – Rules 43(b) and 139 – Post-retiral benefits of an employee can be withheld only in accordance with Rules governing services of petitioner – Judicial enquiry or departmental proceeding against a delinquent totally abates on death of an employee for simple reason that in order to punish an employer, there must be subsistence of employer and employee relationship – Once an employee died said relationship ceases – No person can be substituted in place of dead employee and defend conduct of a dead employee--As such, no order could have been passed withholding retirement or any outstanding dues. (Paras 15 and 16)
Harish Kumar, J. – Heard Mr. Jagdish Prasad Singh, learned cousel for the petitioner and Md. Fazle Karim, learned AC to SC-1.
2. By invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner, who is hapless widow of late Late Ram Vilash Ram @ Ram Nandan Singh seeks direction upon the respondents to pay to her family pension, deathcum- retiral gratuity, leave encashment salary and group insurance etc. with effect from 03.03.2002, the date on which her husband, who was ASI of police, declared civil death, during his service period.
3. The undisputed facts is that the husband of the petitioner had joined the police service on 14.09.1976 on the post of constable pursuant to the Katihar Rail District Order No. 527/76 dated 14.09.1976. After serving so many places, the petitioner’s husband was transferred from Balrampur police station to Salmari O.P. vide District Order No. 1763/1994 dated 01.09.1994 and accordingly he submitted his joining at Salmari O.P., as Assistant Sub-Inspector of police. On 03.03.1995, he left the Salmari O.P. to Katihar for certain necessary work at 9.00 A.M, but could not return back till 07.03.1995 and, as such, having found him trace less, Station Diary Entry No. 131 dated 08.03.1995 was registered for disappearance of late husband of the petitioner and a Special Messenger was deputed for Katihar, his native village and other place to get information about him, but his whereabouts could not be traced out.
4. Since the petitioner’s husband remained trace less for seven years, in such circumstances through Katihar District Order No. 620/02 dated 22.03.2002, he was declared civil death with effect from 03.03.2002 and this information has been given to the concerned Superintendent of Police and the petitioner, who appeared before the Pension Branch, Police Line, Katihar along with all the requisite documents.
5. It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to the aforesaid information, the petitioner submitted all the required pension papers, but she has not been allowed any terminal benefit of her late husband. Later on, certain documents were also asked for by the office of the Superintendent of Police and the same has also been handed over, but the matter remained pending. In the meantime, the petitioner also filed application/representation for payment of admitted death-cum-retiral benefit and family pension. However, the same went in vain, which resulted into filing of C.W.J.C. No. 15290 of 2019 before this Court. The aforesaid writ application was, however, withdrawn by the petitioner after faced with the issue of delay and laches with liberty to take recourse to such other remedies as are available under the law. The copy of which is annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition. Subsequently, the petitioner approached the Superintendent of Police, Katihar along with the order of this Court and also moved before the Public Grievance Redressal Forum, but she did not get any solace, hence the present writ application.
6. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf Superintendent of Police, Katihar (respondent no.4) stating, inter alia, that on receipt of the representation of the petitioner claiming death-cum-retiral benefit of her husband and family pension, a report was called for from the Sergeant Major, Police Line, Katihar and vide Memo No.1305 dated 17.05.2021 a report has submitted to the Superintendent of Police, Katihar.
7. Learned counsel for the State by referring to the materials brought in the report vehemently submits that after the death of the petitioner’s husband she was advised to submit the required pension papers and she was also given reminders for the same and in the meantime, the Police Inspector Manihari/Barsoi Anchal was also directed to enquire the matter of death as well as family details of the erstwhile employee. The Sub-inspector and the Circle officer Shivjee Nagar Circle were also requested to enquire regarding the death and caste of
Retiral benefits are constitutional rights that cannot be denied without due process, and unproven allegations of forgery do not justify withholding such benefits.
Pension and retirement benefits are rights, not discretionary, and must be paid with interest for delays, recognizing the entire service of permanent government employees.
Appointments must be validated through due process; wrongful termination without fair hearing violates Article 311 rights, making the claim for retiree benefits legally enforceable.
An employer cannot recover salaries paid for work rendered by an employee beyond their retirement age if the employee was allowed to continue working based on the date of birth recorded in their serv....
The court affirmed that benefits must be granted based on official records of the deceased employee, rejecting arbitrary denial based on unverified claims.
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
