JUDGMENT & ORDER(CAV)

By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, the widow mother of one Sita Ram Saloi, Constable in Assam Special Reserve Force (hereinafter referred as ASRF) has claimed benefit of family pension under Rule 143 of the Assam Pension (Services) Rules, 1969. The question to be answered in this writ petition is whether mother of a deceased employee can claim family pension under Assam Pension (Services) Rules, 1969.

2. Petitioner’s son Sita Ram Saloi was appointed as Constable in the ASRF, 1st Battalion and he joined on 20.12.1984. He died on 19.04.1990 while in service after suffering due to various ailments. On his death his father (now deceased) Anandi Saloi claimed payment of death cum retirement benefit but while his claim remained pending, he died. Therefore, the present petitioner on the basis of same legal heir certificate dated 15.05.1990 issued by the Sub Divisional Officer, Rangia made a claim for family pension. The Commandant of 1st ASRF Battalion forwarded her application on 17.09.1993. This was followed by another recommendation by the same authority on 05.11.1997. The Deputy Director of Civil Defence sent a proposal to the Accountant General, Assam on 21.11.1997 for sanction of D.C.R.G. in favour of the present petitioner but the pension papers were returned on 20.03.1998 as the calculation was not made on the basis of revised pay scale w.e.f. 01.01.1989. Ultimately on 21.10.1998 the Deputy Director of Civil Defence made request to the Accountant General for sanction of the Family Pension in favour of the petitioner but all these exercises did not yield any result. Under such circumstances, the present petitioner has approached this Court claiming release of family pension w.e.f. 19.04.1990 i.e. the date of death of her son with 18 percent interest per annum on the same.

3. By filing an affidavit-in-opposition on behalf of the respondents No. 1, 2, 3 & 5 an affidavit was sworn by a senior staff officer in the office of the Registrar General of Civil Defence and Commandant General of Home Guard, Assam, Beltola. In the said affidavit it is stated that petitioner is not entitled to family pension as per Rule 143 of the Assam Pension (Services) Rules, 1969. However the other pensionary benefit like cash equivalent to leave salary, GSI money etc. were paid to the next kin of the deceased constable already. In the affidavit the deponent stated that recommendation was made to the Accountant General on 21.10.1998 for according appropriate sanction in this regard but the same did not yield any result.

4. An affidavit-in-opposition has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 6, the Principal Accountant General (A&E), Assam. In paragraph 5 of the said affidavit it is stated that the case of the petitioner was examined and gratuity was authorised in favour of Anandi Saloi, the father of the deceased constable but it was returned on 21.08.1998 by the Treasury Officer with a non-payment certificate on the ground that Anandi Saloi had died on 27.07.1998. Under such circumstances, the order was cancelled and a revised gratuity payment order was prepared and sent in favour of the present petitioner on 06.01.1999. Coming to the question of entitlement of family pension, the accountant General pleaded that under Rule 143 of the Assam Pension (Services) Rules, 1969 parents are not treated as family members of the government servant and they are not entitled to family pension. Parents are included in the family only for the purpose of death cum gratuity and this is not the same amount stood already disbursed to the present petitioner.

5. Mr. I.H. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner has appeared on behalf of the petitioner whereas learned CGC, Mr. U.K. Nair represented the Accountant General.

6. Family pension is benefit given to certain class of legal heirs of deceased Government Employees under Rule 137 to 140 of the Assam Pension (Services) Rules, 1969. Section IV of this

Click Here to Read the rest of this document