2019 Supreme(Ker) 141
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
Shalini Babu W/o. Late Babu T.A. - Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala Local Self Government Department, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram and Ors - Respondent
WP(C).No. 26400 of 2018
Decided on : 04-02-2019
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Sri.Denizen Komath Sri.Denizen Komath K.P.Satheesan Advs.
For the Respondent: Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, Sr.Govt.Pleader
Headnote:
Honorarium - Widow Pension - Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, Sec.160, Rules 3, 3A, 3B, 3C, 4-8 - The court discussed the legal principles regarding the receipt of allowances or honorarium and its classification as profit or remuneration. It emphasized the burden on the respondents to establish that the honorarium and other allowances exceeded the reasonable expenses expected to be incurred by the president of the Panchayat. The court concluded that the petitioner was entitled to the widow pension as her net income did not exceed the ceiling limit of Rs. 1 lakh per year, considering the out of pocket expenses incurred in the position of the president of the Panchayat.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a widow belonging to a backward class, had her widow pension cancelled due to her honorarium as the president of the local Panchayat. The court found that the petitioner's net income did not exceed the ceiling limit for the grant of widow pension, considering her position and reasonable expenses.
Finding of the Court:
The impugned decisions to cancel the widow pension were held to be illegal and ultra vires. The petitioner was found to be eligible for continuous grant of widow pension.
Issues: The court analyzed whether the petitioner's honorarium and allowances exceeded the reasonable expenses expected to be incurred by the president of the Panchayat, and whether the cancellation of the widow pension was justified.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the burden on the respondents to establish that the honorarium and other allowances exceeded the reasonable expenses expected to be incurred by the president of the Panchayat. It concluded that the petitioner was entitled to the widow pension as her net income did not exceed the ceiling limit of Rs. 1 lakh per year, considering the out of pocket expenses incurred in the position of the president of the Panchayat.
Final Decision: The court held the impugned decisions to cancel the widow pension as illegal and ultra vires, and ordered the continuous grant of widow pension to the petitioner.
1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned decisions as per Ext.P-7 proceedings dated 28.6.2018 rendered by the 1st respondent Government in the Local Self Institutions Department and the consequential Ext.P-8 order dated 18.7.2018 rendered by the 3rd respondent Director of Panchayats, whereby they have ordered cancellation of the widow pension, which was earlier granted to the petitioner, on the ground that she is not eligible for the grant of widow pension taking into account the income derived by her as honorarium paid to her as the President of the local Panchayat concerned.
2. There is no serious dispute as to the fact that the petitioner belongs to backward class (Latin Catholic community) and that she is living in a rented house along with her only son (minor son who is studying in Std.-X). Her husband died on 10.1.2014 as evident from Ext.P-1 death certificate. After the death of her husband, she was sanctioned widow pension from March, 2014 onwards, referred to in Ext.P-9 G.O.(Ms).No. 52/2014/SWD dated 20.6.2004, under the scheme framed by the State Government and later she was actually disbursed widow pension w.e.f. June, 2014. As per the earlier prevalent norms contained in G.O.(Ms).No. 59/2013/SWD dated 20.7.2013, a widow would have been eligible for grant of widow pension under the said scheme, if her income from other sources does not exceed Rs. 3 lakhs. Later, the said ceiling limit was reduced as per Ext.P-9 G.O.(Ms).No. 52/2014/SWD dated 20.6.2014, wherein it was held that the person becomes eligible for grant of widow pension only if her income from all sources does not exceed Rs. 1 lakh per annum.
3. It appears that the monthly widow pension that is being disbursed to the petitioner under the said scheme is a meagre amount @ Rs. 1000/-or so, per month. Later, in the elections to the local Panchayats, which was held in the State in November, 2015 the petitioner was successfully elected as a member of the committee of the Panchayat from a women reserved constituency of the Kadamakkudy grama Panchayat, Ernakulam District and later she was also elected as the president of the said Panchayat in December 2015, as the post of president of the said Panchayat was reserved for women. It further appears from the pleadings on both sides, more particularly Ext.P-5 report submitted to the 3rd respondent Director of Panchayats that a person by name A.X.Joseph was then working as a staff of the said Panchayat on deputation basis from the Labour Department. That the petitioner had to take action against him, which led to the suspension of service of that deputation incumbent and later he had left the said deputation assignment. It also appears that his wife, one Smt. Mini Joseph, had submitted Ext.P-2 complaint dated 10.10.2017 to the Finance Committee Chairman of the said Panchayat alleging that the petitioner has committed financial impropriety inasmuch as she is drawing the benefit of widow pension and that going by the income drawn by her as honorarium, as the president of the Panchayat, the same would exceed the ceiling limit of Rs. 1 lakh, for widow pension and that the grant of widow pension to the petitioner is an abuse of the process, etc. Later, the 3rd respondent Director of Panchayats had issued Ext.P-5 letter dated 16.2.2018 to the said Panchayat for directing to furnish a report on the allegations raised against the petitioner as per Ext.P-2, on the points enumerated in Ext.P-5. Thereupon, the Secretary of the said Panchayat had submitted Ext.P-6 report dated 22.2.2018 before the 4th respondent giving clarifications of various details. It is stated therein that the petitioner was granted widow pension pursuant to her application dated 24.2.2014 and that she was disbursed widow pension based on resolution No.5 of the said Panchayat and that pension was disbursed to her w.e.f. March, 2014 and that the said disbursal of widow pension is current and live. That the petitioner had taken charge as the pres