APHC010564432022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3458]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 35335/2022 Between:

1. Y ADDANAPUDI RENUKA DEVI,, D/O. (LATE) B.H. VENKATA RAO, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 1-3/26-17, R.R NAGAR, VIDHYADHARAPURAM, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY HER BROTHER B.H.NAGADAMODARAM, S/O. (LATE) B.H. VENKATA RAO, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,(SAME ADDRESS) (SINCE PETITIONER IS MENTALLY DISABLED)

...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND PLANNING, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P

2. T HE OFFICE OF PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, M.G ROAD, GOVERNOR PETA, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

3. T HE GOVERNMENT GENERAL HOSPITAL, REP. BY ITS SUPERINTENDENT/ADDL. DIRECTOR, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

4. T HE GOVERNMENT GENERAL HOSPITAL, REP. BY ITS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR (ADMIN), VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue an appropriate order, writ or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents 3 and 4 in issuing the impugned proceedings vide no. R.0 No. 18251E3/2022 dated. 02.09.2022 basing on the proceedings no.

PM2/AP/A1/P5N-614/SP-553/1993-101295542 dated. 20.02.2020 issued by the respondent no.2 stating that the petitioner is not eligible for sanction of Family Pension as per G.O.Ms.No.152 Finance (HR.III - Pension) Department dated. 25.11.2019 is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the A.P Revised Pension Rules,1980, contrary to the orders passed in W.P No. 19671 of 2020 and batch and Set-aside the proceedings of the respondents 2 to 4 and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 4 to sanction the family pension to the petitioner on the ground of Widowed and Mentally Retarded Daughter of Late B.H Venakata Rao from the date of his death dt.15.02.2018and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.

IA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondents 2 and 4 to sanction the family pension to the petitioner on the ground of Widowed and Mentally Retarded Daughter of Late B.H Venakata Rao from the date of Petitioner's father death dt.15.02.2018and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. PULIPATI RADHIKA Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR SERVICES IV

2. GP FOR SERVICES I

3. K SWARNA SESHU The Court made the following:

ORDER:

Heard Smt. Pulipati Radhika, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services – III.

2. Challenging the proceedings of the respondents in rejecting the grant of family pension, the instant writ petition has been filed.

3. It is contended that the petitioner’s father had retired from service as Senior Assistant from Government Hospital, Vijayawada. During his lifetime, he made an application to the 3^rd respondent seeking family pension to his daughter - the petitioner herein, as she is a widow and was depending on him as she is a mentally retarded person. The same was not considered, after his death, the petitioner had filed the instant writ petition seeking grant of family pension. The 3^rd respondent had forwarded the proposal for grant of family pension to the 2^nd respondent. The said application was returned by the 2^nd respondent as there is no provision under law which entitles a widowed daughter to seek family pension. Basing on the same, the impugned proceedings dated 02.09.2022 have been passed, the respondents 4 and 5 rejected the application of the petitioner citing G.O.Ms.No.152, Finance