Family pension benefits under the Punjab Civil Service 1964 Rules are exclusively reserved for regular employees on a pensionable establishment; therefore, dependents of daily-wage or non-regularized workers are strictly ineligible for such benefits.

ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J. (ORAL)

CM-14364-CWP-2025

This application under Section 151 CPC has been filed on behalf of the applicant-petitioner seeking permission to place on record the complete copy of the Family Pension Scheme, 1964 as Annexure P-14.

For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. Annexure P-14 is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at an appropriate place.

Main Case

1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the communication of the third respondent dated 13.01.2004, whereby the petitioner’s claim for the grant of family pension as well as appointment on compassionate ground has been rejected. The petitioner has also sought quashing of Clause-D of Rule 11 of Punjab Civil Services Rules Volume II Part-I, 1964 (for short, ‘1964 Rules’). A further prayer has been made to command the respondents to pay family pension to the petitioner and also offer compassionate appointment.

2. The undisputed facts, in the context of which the claim has been put forth in the present petition, are that the petitioner’s husband was engaged as a Chowkidar with the respondent(s)-Department on 01.08.1994. The services of the deceased husband of the petitioner were terminated on 05.09.1995. An industrial dispute was raised which culminated in passing of an award dated 01.02.2000 granting relief of reinstatement along with 20% back-wages. The husband of the petitioner was not reinstated and the award remained unimplemented. Ultimately, the husband of the petitioner died on 29.04.2001 leaving behind the petitioner who happens to be the widow of the deceased employee. Three other sons were also left behind by the deceased employee. An application for compassionate appointment was made along with request for payment of back-wages with interest. When the claim was not addressed, the petitioner sent a legal notice to the respondents but the same was denied by the respondents vide order dated 13.01.2004 which is contained in Annexure P-5. In the reply, the respondents contend that the deceased employee Mool Chand was not in service and the provisions of pensionable rules were not applicable upon him as he was not a regular employee. It is, further, stated that the award was passed in view of the fact that the deceased employee had completed 240 days of working and the compensation in terms of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was not paid.

3. According to the respondents, the actual working of the deceased employee was below 240 days. It is also the case of the respondents that the only relief granted to the employee was with regard to reinstatement along with 20% back-wages. As per the respondents, the reinstatement would restore the deceased employee on the post held by him which was of a daily-wager and his status would not convert into that of a regular employee which alone would justify issuance of pensionable benefits to the petitioner-widow.

4. The payment of family pension is governed by the Family Pension Scheme, 1964 (for short, ‘Scheme of 1964’). The Scheme of 1964 is formulated to afford family pension to the deceased Government employee(s) as per the rates specified in the Scheme of 1964. Rule 3 of the Scheme of 1964 provides for the applicability of the said Scheme, which reads as under:-

“3. This scheme comes into force with effect from 1st July, 1964 and is applicable to all regular employees on pensionable establishment-temporary or permanent who were in service on the 1st July, 1964, or are recruited thereafter.”

5. Rule 4(i) and (ii) of the Scheme of 1964 are also relevant an