Research › Browse › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

1999 DIGILAW 1055 (PAT)

Ruchi Kumar @ Ruchi Sinha v. State Of Bihar

1999-10-05

R.M.PRASAD

body1999
Judgment 1. The petitioner in this writ petition claims for payment of family pension with effect from 1.11.1993 when his father Late Umeshwar Prasad @ Late Umeshwar Prasad Sinha, who was in Government service as Assistant in the Sub-Treasury Office, Lakhisarai died on 31.10.1993. 2. The petitioners father retired from the service on 31.10.1985 and thereafter received his pensionary dues, including pension till his death. It is stated that the mother of the petitioner predeceased her husband on 2.10.1992 leaving behind the petitioner only as minor and unmarried daughter besides their other heirs. According to the petitioner, her date of birth is 1.3.1979. The petitioner at the time of retirement of her father i.e. on 31.10.1985 was about six years and eight months and at the time of his death i.e. on 31.10.1993 was about 14 years and 8 months and at present is below 21 years of age. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that under rule 186(2) (iii) of the Bihar Pension Rules, the petitioner is entitled to get family pension immediately after the death of her father on 31.10.1993 till she marries or attains the age of 21 years, whichever occurs earlier. 4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the District Magistrate- cum-Collector, Munger (respondent no.3) in which the aforementioned facts have not been disputed. 5. Under such circumstances this Court fails to appreciate as to how the petitioner has been kept deprived of the payment of family pension with effect from 1.11.1993 till date. According to rule 186 of the Bihar Pension Rules a family pension will take effect from the day following the death of the Government servant or from such other date as the Provincial Government may decide. A family pension is payable in case of an unmarried daughter or minor sister, until marriage or until she attains the age of 21 years, whichever occurs earlier. It is not the case of the respondents that the Provincial Government fixed any other date for payment of family pension to the dependant of the deceased Government servant. 6. The petitioner has filed a photo copy of the matriculation certificate (An-nexure 3) in support of her age- In the said certificate 1.3.1979 has been shown as her date of birth, which has not been disputed by the respondents in counter affidavit. 6. The petitioner has filed a photo copy of the matriculation certificate (An-nexure 3) in support of her age- In the said certificate 1.3.1979 has been shown as her date of birth, which has not been disputed by the respondents in counter affidavit. Under such circumstances, the petitioner is held to be entitled for family pension with effect from 1.11,1993. 7. The writ petition is, thus, allowed, Respondents no.3 and 4 are directed to issue necessary sanction order for payment of family pension to the petitioner within two weeks of the receipt/production of a copy of this order. 8. Having regard to the fact that the family pension admissible to the petitioner has been kept withheld for now over six and half years, this Court directs that the petitioner shall be entitled to get interest at the rate of 10% per annpm over the said amount from due date till the necessary sanction order for payment is issued, which shall also be calculated and paid to the petitioner by issuing the necessary sanction order along with tne aforesaid dues. In the facts and circumstances, the petitioner shall also be entitled for cost of Rs. 2,000/- (two thousand), for which also the necessary sanction order shall be issued within the aforesaid time.