Back
2016 Supreme(Jhk) 1471
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RATNAKER BHENGRA, J.
Lakhi Devi - Petitioner
Versus
The Secretary, Jharkhand State Electricity Board & Ors. - Respondents
W.P. (S) No. 3323 of 2011
Decided On : 14-12-2016
For the Petitioner: Mr. Bhanu Kumar, Adv.
For JSEB : Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv.
For BSEB : Miss. Samta
Headnote:Service Law – Family pension and retiral benefits were denied – the petitioner’s husband was died during the period of suspension – it was contended that her husband during the pendency of departmental proceedings so the proceeding lapsed on this reason – the respondent contended that the petitioner is not entitle to retiral benefits as her husband got the appointment on fraud – it was held that the petitioner’s husband died in harasses so his successor is entitle to aforesaid benefits as per law – accordingly respondent directed to consider the matter of the petitioner and provide him the benefits – the respondent contended that the matter is pending before the concerned authority so the petitioner can not seek relief – it was considered that the employer must have provide the family pension to the petitioner after the death of her husband despite the fact of departmental proceedings or pending litigation etc. – the petitioner’s rights under article 21 were violated at the denial of aforesaid benefits – the respondent contended that the petitioner did not disclose the fact of writ petition preferred earlier – the petitioner need not to wait for his relief – it was observed that the hiding of facts by the petitioner, left the petitioner to writ jurisdiction remedy – the facts if reveal before the court would entitle her the remedies that she sought – the petitioner is already lost her husband later denial of benefits will leave her in mercy conditions, accordingly the respondent directed to provide her the pension along with other benefits as per law.
This writ petition has been filed for payment of arrears of salary, amount of family pension, gratuity and other post retiral dues with effect from 15.10.1998 since the husband of the petitioner had died on 14.10.1998 in harness and no payment has been made till date.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the husband of the petitioner late Sudarshan Prasad was posted as Meter Reader, Electric Division, Jamshedpur, under the erstwhile Bihar State Electricity Board on the basis of matriculation certificate. Some doubts appeared regarding genuineness of the matriculation certificate of the husband of the petitioner and as such, correspondence was made from Bihar Vidyalay Pariksha Samitee, Patna for verification of the date of birth as also for the genuineness of the matriculation certificate vide letter contained in Memo No. 954 dated 08.09.1994 issued by Director (Personnel) Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna. Thereafter, husband of the petitioner was directed to submit original mark-sheet, original admit card and school leaving certificate by the Director (Personnel) but for some reason husband of the petitioner failed to submit the same and as such, he was placed under suspension vide office order no. 2420 dated 10.06.1998.
3. Joint Secretary (Vigilance), Bihar Vidyalaya Pariksha Samitee, Patna vide letter no. 42 dated 18.08.1998 informed the Electrical Superintending Engineer, Electric Supply Division, Jamshedpur that the service of late Surendra Prasad was found to be forged. It is stated that although the husband of the petitioner was placed under suspension and some proceeding was initiated, no punishment was imposed upon late delinquent Sudarshan Prasad and in the meantime, he died in harness on 14.10.1998 during his suspension.
4. The widow of late Sudarshan Prasad sent many representations for payment of post-retiral benefits as also for compassionate appointment and decision was taken by the Joint Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna vide letter no. 1638 dated 29.09.1999 as follows:-
(a) Wife of late Sudarshan Prasad will not be entitled to death cum retiral benefits as the deceased has got the job in the Board on the basis of fake matriculation certificate.
(b) Dependents of the deceased late Sudarshan Prasad will not be considered for compassionate appointment.
(c) The amount due to General Provident Fund and Group Savings Scheme will be released as per the Rules of the Board.
5. The petitioner however, in pursuance of the decision of the letter no. 1638 dated 29.09.1999 has been paid certain amount of G.P.F. and certain mode of Group Savings Scheme.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that that it is settled law that whenever any employee dies in harness during the pendency of any department proceeding or any disciplinary action pending for purpose of imposition of penalty on account of misconduct, the proceeding automatically lapsed or is abated by reason of death of delinquent employee. The husband of the petitioner was placed under suspension vide office order no. 2420 dated 16.06.1998 for contemplation of some departmental proceeding, but said late Sudarshan Prasad died on 14.10.1998 while he was under suspension, therefore the deceased employee remained an employee of Bihar State Electricity Board and the relation of master and servant was not severed because no final punishment was imposed upon the delinquent employee. Expression of this contention is cited in Jayanti Devi Vs. State of Bihar, (2001) 3 BLJR 2179, wherein it is cited that “by reason of death of any delinquent departmental proceeding or any disciplinary action would terminate and abate”. Petitioner has also referred to the case of Basudeo Tiwary Vs. Sido Kanhu University & Others, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, AIR 1998 SC 3261, wherein the Apex Court has observed as under:-
14. The appellant has since demised during the pendency of these proceedings, no further direction either as to further inquiry or r
