CWP No.24430 of 2017

- 1 -

*****

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP No.24430 of 2017

Reserved on :01.01.2021

Date of decision:25.01.2021

Baljinder Kaur

... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

... Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA

Present:

Mr. G.S.Sullar, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

Mr. Sandeep Mann, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

(The proceedings were conducted through video

conferencing, as per instructions.)

*****

G.S. Sandhawalia

, J.

In the present writ petition, filed under Articles 226/227 of the

Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order dated 12.09.2017

(Annexure P-8) passed by respondent no.2 whereby her claim for grant of

arrears of monthly financial assistance and family pension has been rejected.

Resultantly, a writ in the nature of mandamus is sought for releasing the

benefits of family pension including the arrears of monthly financial assistance,

family pension and other benefits along with the arrears of revised pay on

account of revision of pay scale from November, 2011 and other admissible

benefits due to Tarsem Singh, husband of the petitioner, who had died during

service on 17.11.2008. Interest @ 18% per annum is also claimed on account

of delay in disbursal of the aforesaid amount(s).

The reasoning given to deny the said benefits is that the conduct,

VINOD KUMAR

2021.01.27 09:40

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

phhc

CWP No.24430 of 2017

- 2 -

*****

as such, of the petitioner was not good as she has been convicted by the Court

and, therefore, pecuniary benefits could not be extended to her on both

accounts monthly financial assistance and the liability of family pension. For

the aforesaid reasoning, respondent no.2 relied upon the provisions of the

Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of the Deceased

Government Employees Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules of

2006”) and the pension provisions under the Punjab Civil Services Rules

Volume-II including the Family Pension Rules, 1964. The said order has been,

thus, defended by filing the written statement that the pension is not a charity or

bounty and it is a conditional payment depending upon the sweet will of the

employer. The person, convicted for the offence of murder, cannot be allowed

the said benefit and since the petitioner's conviction has not been stayed and

only her sentence has been suspended while releasing her on bail, she was held

not entitled to any pecuniary benefits under the Haryana Government. Rule

2.2(a) of the Punjab Civil Services Rules Volume-II (as applicable to the State

of Haryana) has been relied upon by the respondents.

The brief background of the present case is that the petitioner's

husband was working as a teacher in the respondent-Education Department on

regular basis since 1986. He died on 17.11.2008, leaving behind the petitioner

as his widow along with children. In view of the Rules of 2006, the financial

assistance became payable on the death of any Government employee, to the

family of such deceased employee, and it is to be continued to be payable till

the date specified in the Rules of 2006 or the date the employee would have

retired from the Government service on attaining the age of superannuation,

which in the present case is 31.10.2017. The eligibility of the petitioner to

VINOD KUMAR

2021.01.27 09:40

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

phhc

CWP No.24430 of 2017

- 3 -

*****

receive the family pension would come thereafter. The petitioner continued to

draw the monthly financial assistance for some time, but then she was involved

in FIR No.126 dated 31.07.2009. She was convicted on 19.11.2011 along with

Gurjeet Singh and sentenced to life imprisonment on 23.11.2011 (Annexure

P-5). She firstly filed CWP No.5086 of 2015 alleging that no order had been

passed