IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No. 15778 of 2024

In the matter of an application under Articles 226 & 227 of the

Constitution of India.

………………

Samsara Khatun …. Petitioner

-versus-

Union of India & Ors. …. Opposite Parties

For Petitioner : Mr. R.C. Nayak, Advocate For Opp. Parties : Mr. G. Mohanty, Advocate

(Opp. Party Nos. 1 to 3)

PRESENT:

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date of Hearing: 13.11.2025 & Date of Judgment: 13.11.2025

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Biraja Prasanna Satapathy, J

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Heard Mr. R.C. Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. G. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the

Opp. Parties.

3. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia challenging rejection of the Petitioner’s claim to get the benefit of family pension vide the impugned communication dtd.07.03.2024 so issued under Annexure-5 by Opp. Party No. 3. Vide the said communication claim of the Petitioner was so rejected on the ground that Petitioner since has become a widow on 24.03.2019 and not during the life time of her parents, who expired on 31.08.2011 and 14.09.2012 respectively, Petitioner is not eligible to get the benefit.

4. It is contended that on retirement of the father of the Petitioner on 01.02.1996, he was sanctioned with pension by the authorities of Paradip Port Trust. On his death on 31.08.2011, Petitioner’s mother was extended with the benefit of family pension and she continued with the benefit till she expired on 14.09.2012.

4.1. Subsequently, Petitioner in terms of the provisions contained under Rule 50 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 made her application to get the benefit of family pension on 16.11.2020 under Annexure-2.

Rule 50 of the said Rules reads as follows:-

“(i) The family pension is payable to the unmarried / widowed /divorced daughters until she gets married or remarried or until she starts earning her livelihood, whichever is earlier.

(sub rule 6(iii) of Rule 54)

(ii) The family pension is payable to the unmarried / widowed /divorced daughters above the age of 25, after all unmarried children have attained the 25 years of age or started earning their livelihood whichever is earlier. If the deceased government servant/pensioner has survived by any disabled child, the widowed/divorced/unmarried daughter will be eligible to receive family pension only after the turn of disabled child.

(DoP&PW OM 1/13/09-P& PW date 11th September

2013)

(iii) Divorced daughter is eligible for family pension where the divorce proceedings had been filed in a competent Court during the lifetime of the employee / pensioner or his/her spouse but divorce took place after their death, provided the claimant fulfils all other conditions for grant of family pension under Rule 54 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. In such cases, the family pension will commence from the date of divorce.”

4.2. It is contended that even though Petitioner made the application to get the benefit on 16.11.2020, but the same while was kept pending, but on the other hand Petitioner was asked to file the succession certificate. The same was also complied by the Petitioner, after obtaining the same and its submission vide Annexure-4 series. However, on the ground that Petitioner has become a widow on 24.03.2019, and the same being after the life time of her parents, her claim was rejected.

4.3. It is contended that Petitioner’s claim was so rejected, in terms of the provisions contained under CCS (Pension) Rules 2021.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that since Petitioner made the claim when the provisions contained under 1972 Rules was in force and the deceased employee also died during subsistence of the 1972 Rules, claim of the Petitioner could not have been rejected taking recourse to the provisions contained under CCS (Pension)

Rules 2021.

4.4. It