ORDER :

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Co-operation and learned Government Pleader for Services-I.

2. This writ petition is filed to issue a writ, order or direction more in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the impugned Proceedings Lr.No.Pen(1)2193/13, dated 03.09.2016 of the 2nd respondent as void, illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and also contrary to A.P. Government Servants (Family Pension) Rules, 1964 and consequently direct the respondents to fix and pay the family pension due to the petitioner with interest on arrears of family pension with all consequential benefits.

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows:

a) The petitioner’s husband was selected and appointed as Agriculture Extension Officer in the year 1967 and joined on 11.01.1967. While he was working in the said post, he expired while in service on 22.01.1969, after completing two years of service and that he has satisfactorily completed his probationary period. The petitioner made representation on 25.02.1969 requesting for payment of family pension and death benefits.

b) On repeated requests made by the petitioner, the 3rd respondent vide Memo No.Estt(1)981/09, dated 04.11.2009 requested the Assistant Director of Agriculture (r), Nizamabad and others to send remarks. The 4th respondent submitted remarks on 28.03.2011 and that the 3rd respondent sought directions from the 2nd respondent for settlement of family pension of the petitioner.

c) The petitioner understood that the reason for not granting family pension is only on the ground that the records are not available pertaining to the petitioner’s husband in their office, for which the petitioner cannot be deprived of legitimate right for getting family pension.

d) The Government issued Circular Memo dated 22.03.1994 to sanction the family pension to the dependants though the records are not available and are destroyed not on account of their fault but on account of floods, fire etc. The Government also issued amendment to the A.P. Revised Pension Rules, 1980 vide G.O.Ms.No.224, dated 28.08.1982.

e) When the respondents had not granted the family pension, the petitioner filed O.A.No.3058 of 2013 before A.P.A.T., Hyderabad and the Tribunal passed interim orders on 29.04.2013 directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner.

f) The 2nd respondent vide Memo No.A5(1)453/2009, dated 06.07.2013 directed the 3rd respondent to take action as per the instructions.

g) When the 2nd respondent issued the impugned proceedings dated 03.09.2016 rejecting the claim of the petitioner that the service register is not traceable, the petitioner filed this writ petition, aggrieved by the same.

4. The relevant portion i.e. last para of the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent, reads as under:

“It is to state that as per the provision under Rule 50, Family pension is entitled to those employees medically examined and found fit for appointment under Government prior to his appointment. Generally the medical fitness is obtained for regular & permanent employment. since his appointment was temporary and his medical fitness might not have been obtained, after considering the fact the Accountant General, A.P. Hyderabad has rejected the pension proposals submitted, while observing that the services of the deceased were neither confirmed nor regularized the family of the deceased is not entitled to the family pension or DCRG the same was informed to the petitioner herein well in 1970 i,e., vide Lr.No 11/88/69 Dt 9-6-1970 by the then Block Development Officer, Panchayat Sameti block, Armoor. Now after a lapse of about 43 years of above intimation to her, she has filled O.A. 3058/2015 in A.P.A.T again claiming for the family pension. Since, the petitioner was informed of the Accountant General's. rejection for the family pension during 1970 itself, and there was no claim by her since then, the records connected to the case might have been treated as not