The duty of the petitioner to maintain the surviving mother of her deceased husband was unfailing, and the official respondents' decision to fix 25% of the gross salary as the appropriate maintenance amount was upheld.

JUDGMENT

Rajbir Sehrawat, J. - This is the petition filed by petitioner under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the show cause notice dated 14.09.2018 (Annexure P-8) and order dated 02.10.2018 (Annexure 10) passed by respondent No.4, whereby the petitioner was directed to pay 25% of gross salary as maintenance allowance to the private respondents.

2. The brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that husband of the petitioner, Kuldeep Singh, who is the son of respondents No.5 and 6, was serving in CISF as Constable. However, he died in harness on 13.02.1998. The petitioner had only one daughter namely Priyanka Kumari out of the marriage with above said Kuldeep Singh, since deceased. Kuldeep Singh had nominated petitioner as recipient of the retiral benefits, therefore, the family pension was sanctioned in favour of the petitioner. Later on the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment on account of death of her husband-Kuldeep Singh. As per the policy, official respondents had asked the petitioner to furnish an undertaking that she would maintain the parents of deceased husband Kuldeep Singh. That undertaking was duly furnished by the petitioner on 24.05.2002. On condition of maintaining the parents of deceased husband, the petitioner was offered appointment as Lady Constable in CISF on 31.05.2002. Thereafter the petitioner got re-married on 12.03.2005. Since the petitioner had re-married; therefore, she applied for; and accordingly the payment of family pension was started; in favour of daughter of the petitioner. Hence, the benefit of family pension was being released in favour of the daughter of the petitioner and the salary of the new appointment started coming to the petitioner. However, since the appointment was itself subject to the condition of the petitioner maintaining the parents of the deceased Kuldeep Singh, therefore, the petitioner started making payment of 1,000/- per month only as maintenance. The parents of the deceased reluctantly accepted that amount for some time. However, finding the same to be insufficient, they approached the Rajasthan High Court with a prayer that they be granted 50% of the gross salary of the petitioner as maintenance of the parents. When the matter was under consideration before the High Court of Rajasthan, the petitioner furnished an undertaking that she will maintain the parents of late Kuldeep Singh properly. Accordingly, the writ petition No.17648 of 2012 (Dharma Devi & another Vs. Union of India & others) was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 07.09.2016 and the petitioners (respondents No.5 & 6 herein) were granted liberty to approach the official respondents with their grievance. Accordingly a comprehensive representation was made by the former parents-in-law of the petitioner. While the official respondents were considering the said representation, the petitioner furnished another undertaking on 10.11.2016 that she will pay an amount of 5,000/- per month as maintenance to the parents of the deceased Ex-husband. Accordingly, the matter was disposed off at the level of official respondents and the petitioner started paying 5,000/- as the maintenance amount. However, this amount was not found to be sufficient by the parents for their proper upkeep. They made a prayer to the official respondents to increase the maintenance amount to 10,000/-. However, the said request was not accepted by the official respondents and no increase in the maintenance amount was made by the petitioner. Accordingly, the parents had to file second writ petition before the High Court of Rajasthan as CWP No.297 of 2018. The High Court of Rajasthan disposed off that writ petition vide order dated 09.04.2018 by directing the official respondents to consider and decide the claim of the parents of the deceased husband of the petitioner, by passing reasoned speaking order, as expeditiously as possible. Pursuant