Hon’ble Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

2. The petitioner, who is said to be adopted son of late Girish Dutt Singh, who was working as Lecturer in Shaheed-A-Azam Sardar Bhagat Singh Inter College, Gonda has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 18th March, 2015 passed by the Deputy Director of Education, (Secondary), 9th Region, Faizabad whereby his claim for grant of family pension has been rejected.

3. The only reason indicated in the impugned order while denying the claim of the petitioner for family pension is that deed of adoption is said to have been executed on 28th May, 2013, whereas the proceedings of adoption took place on 10th October, 2013 before the Deputy-Registrar, Kaisarganj, Bahraich and hence the adoption deed being relied upon by the petitioner cannot be said to be the basis of establishing that the petitioner was adopted by the deceased employee late Girish Dutt Singh during his life time.

4. The aforesaid reason given by the Deputy Director of Education, (Secondary), 9th Region, Faizabad is based on complete mis-reading of the facts of this case, as also the legal provisions regarding adoption amongst Hindus in terms of the provisions contained in the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956.

5. The adoption deed which has been relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner to claim family pension is on record as Annexure 3 to the writ petition. The said adoption deed was executed on 28th May, 2013 recording therein that adoption of the petitioner by the deceased employee late Girish Dutt Singh and his wife late Kusum Singh took place on 10th December, 2010. It is not in dispute that on the date on which adoption took place i.e. 10th December, 2010 according to the rituals and religious rites, the petitioner was minor. It is also not in dispute that petitioner’s adoptive father late Girish Dutt Singh has expired on 29th May, 2013 in an accident and subsequently his wife late Kusum Singh also died on 5th May, 2014.

6. The only question which requires decision by this Court is as to whether the finding recorded by the Deputy Director of Education, Faizabad in relation to the adoption is correct and supported by law.

7. Adoption amongst Hindus is governed by the provisions contained in the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. According to Section 5 of the said Act, adoption is regulated by Chapter-II of the said Act. Section 6 provides that for an adoption to be valid, the person adopting should have the capacity, and also the right, to take in adoption and further that the person giving in adoption should also have the capacity to do so. It further provides that the person adopted should also be capable of being taken in adoption. Regarding the capability of the adoptive parents and the biological parents of the petitioner to take and give in adoption, there is no dispute. Section 11 of the aforesaid Act, inter alia, provides that in every adoption, certain conditions must be complied with including the condition that the child to be adopted must be actually given and taken in adoption by the parents or guardian with an intent to transfer the child from the family of his birth.

8. In the instant case, as per the recitals made in the adoption deed, the giving and taking ceremony in adoption relating to the petitioner was held on 10th December, 2010 according to the religious rituals and rites, thus in-fact the actual giving and taking in adoption of the petitioner by his adoptive parents and biological parents was held on 10 December, 2010 and since that date, the petitioner had stood transferred from the family of his birth. The said recital has clearly been made in the adoption deed which was executed subsequently on 28th May, 2013. Unfortunately, the very next day of execution of adoption deed i.e. 29th May, 2013, the adoptive father of the petitioner, who was the de