Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 173 (JK)

Tawseef Ahmad Parra v. State Of J. &K.

2005-06-09

MANSOOR AHMAD MIR

body2005
1. The petitioner has sought indulgence of this Court for commanding the respondents to release the family pension and not to stop the same and also not effect any recovery on the grounds which can be aptly and precisely summarized as under; - That the petitioner is the adopted son of Mohammad Ramzan Parra. The District Judge, Baramulla has appointed Ghulam Mohammad Parray son of Muhammad Ramzan Parra, resident of Kunan, Baba-gund Bandipora as guardian of the petitioner. The respondent No.3 sanctioned family pension under FP Payment order No.402372 for an amount of Rs.1275/- per month plus D.A. w.e.f. Ist December 1997 to 09.09.2014 in terms of annexure-B. The petitioner was regularly receiving family pension till ending April 2003 but without any justification, same has been stopped w.e.f. May 2003. The respondents have no authority to stop the same. 2. Respondents have filed reply. It is profitable to reproduce para 2 and 3 of the reply herein; - 2. With regard to this para, it is submitted that the Photostat copy placed on record in the shape of guardian certificate dt.26.12.97 issued by the court of Learned Distt. Judge, Baramulla, appointing Gh.Mohmad Para as guardian of petitioner (minor) transpires that guardian™s parentage is unfilled nor is shown as adopted son of the deceased Govt. employee. Nor the certificate shows that the deceased Govt. employee had died issueless. In any case, complaints were received through post by the respondent deptt. regarding the said matter. The respondent No.2 got the matter investigated through Dy. Director, Sopore and it came to surface that guardian Ghulam Mohmad Para, in order to obtain family pension benefit had obtained the guardianship certificate of his minor son Tawseef Ahmad, who was allegedly adopted by the deceased employee. The complaint was forwarded by the Protocol Office in Chief Minister™s Sectt. To the respondent No.2 with the remarks to ˜look into it™. Copy of complaint is enclosed herewith as annexure (R1). The complaint stands forwarded to the SP, Crime and SP Vigilance by the complainant. The petitioner by way of misrepresentation of facts, made the official machinery including respondent No.2 to move in wrong direction which has caused wrongful loss to the government exchequer which invites penal action against the petitioner and his guardian. 3. As already submitted that the deceased Government employee has not died issueless. The petitioner by way of misrepresentation of facts, made the official machinery including respondent No.2 to move in wrong direction which has caused wrongful loss to the government exchequer which invites penal action against the petitioner and his guardian. 3. As already submitted that the deceased Government employee has not died issueless. The matter needs to be investigated by this Hon™ble Court as there was no question of deceased government employee adopting the present guardian™s minor son.� 3. Heard. Admit. With the consensus of leaned counsel for the parties, the case is taken up for final adjudication. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the family pension has been stopped without hearing the petitioner, thus the principles of natural justice have been violated. 4. Mr. Rathore argued that the petitioner has committed fraud and matter is being enquired into and has also stated at bar that petitioner will be heard before passing final order. Further, he argued that in terms of SRO 312 dated 29th November, 1995, the petitioner is not entitled to family pension for the reasons that the deceased had six issues of his own and even the guardian Ghulam Mohammad Parra appointed by District Judge, Baramulla is the father of the minor and the said person is son of the deceased Mohammad Ramzan Parra. Explanation-III to SRO 312 contain note 1. It is profitable to reproduce the same herein; - Note 1: Minor son(s) and un-married daughter(s) shall include step children, adopted children and posthumous children having the age they remain entitled to family pension. Adopted child/children shall mean child/children adopted by Government servant before or after retirement provided such Government servant had no issue of his/her own. The adoption document shall be registered in a Court of law. No other document such as succession certificate, will deed, affidavit etc be accepted for grant of family pension.� 5. In terms of this provision, the pension cannot be granted in favour of adopted child/children when the Government servant is having his own issues. Mr. Rathore argued that fraud has been committed. It is profitable to refrain from offering comments because as per the argument of Mr. Rathore the competent authority is conducting enquiry and has to pass final order. 6. In the given circumstances, respondents must provide an opportunity to the petitioner before passing final order. Mr. Rathore argued that fraud has been committed. It is profitable to refrain from offering comments because as per the argument of Mr. Rathore the competent authority is conducting enquiry and has to pass final order. 6. In the given circumstances, respondents must provide an opportunity to the petitioner before passing final order. If the respondent no.2 will come to the conclusion that the fraud has been committed, he shall draw action against all those persons who are involved in the commission of said act(s). The respondent no.2 is further directed to conclude the enquiry and pass final order within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 7. Mr. Rathore is directed to get the order served upon the respondent No.2. Registry is directed to furnish copy of this order to Mr. Rathore for compliance. Accordingly, the writ petition Alongwith connected CMP(s) are disposed of. Interim direction dated 5th August 2003 is vacated.