[2025:RJ-JP:27741]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11754/2012 Meera Devi W/o Late Shri Kailash Chand Bairwa, Ganesh Vihar Colony, Mandawar Road, Mahuwa, Distt. Dausa.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Education, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. Director, Sanskrit Education, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

3. Director, Medical And Health Services, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

4. District Collector, Dausa.

5. Deputy Collector, Mahuwa, Distt. Dausa. 6. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Dausa.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Kusum Saini for Mr. Chiranji Lal Saini For Respondent(s) : Ms. Deepa Singh for Ms. Manju Joshi HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

Order

24/07/2025

1. By means of filing instant civil writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has impugned the order dated 12.08.2011 so also order dated 16.08.2011 (Annexures-6 & 7), issued by the respondents, denying grant of ex-gratia amount to petitioner under Rule 75 of the Rajasthan Pension Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1996"), on account of sudden death of petitioner's husband.

2. Having heard respective counsels for both the parties and perusal of the record, it has transpired that petitioner's husband, namely, Kailash Chand Bairwa, Teacher Grade-III was assigned duties in the National Vaccination Programme (Election/Pulse Polio). He rendered service in the said Pulse Polio Programme on 10.01.2010 and 11.01.2010. After duty hours, he suffered brain hemorrhage, due to which, he was hospitalized and later on, died at SMS Hospital on 12.01.2010.

3. Petitioner being widow of deceased Kailash Chand Bairwa, claimed grant of ex-gratia amount stating inter-alia that death of her husband occurred due to work stress. Her prayer for ex-gratia amount was considered on merits and vide order impugned dated 12.08.2011, it was held that since petitioner's husband did not die while on duty, rather his death occurred post duty hours due to brain hemorrhage, hence, petitioner is not entitled for grant of ex-

gratia amount as per Rule 75 of the Rules of 1996.

For ready reference Rule 75(1) of the Rules of 1996 reads as under:

“75. Ex-gratia grant to the family of a Government servant (1)Subject to the provision of this Chapter except as otherwise provided, an ex-gratia grant shall be admissible under sub rule (2) to the family of a Government servant who dies while on duty in one of the following circumstances, namely:-

(a) in an accident;

(b) due to injury intentionally inflicted or caused in consequence of the due performance of his/her official duties, (c) due to injury intentionally inflicted or caused in consequence of his/her official position, (d) by violence attributable to causes relative to his/her service; or (e) in connection with special assignments like "Election duty", "Census work" and/or such other assignments which do not fall within normal duties of the post held by the government servant.’’

4. Indisputably, death of the petitioner's husband has not occurred during the duty hours and case of the petitioner for grant of ex-gratia amount does not fall in any of the criteria prescribed under Rule 75(1) of the Rules of 1996. Hence, the denial of ex- gratia amount to the petitioner vide order dated 12.08.2011 as also order dated 16.08.2011 (Annexures-6 & 7) may not be held as arbitrary, illegal or contrary to the Rules/ Scheme.

5. In such view of matter, the claim of petitioner for grant of ex-gratia amount is devoid of substance and same is hereby rejected.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

7. Any other pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J TN/38