Judgment Govind Mathur, J.-By this writ petition a direction is sought by the petitioner for the respondent State to release the amount of gratuity, payable to late Sh. Shiv Singh, to the petitioner being nominated for getting the same under Rule 59 of Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1996). 2. The petitioner is nephew of one Sh. Shiv Singh who was in employment of the Education Department, Government of Rajasthan as Teacher Grade III. The aforesaid Sh. Shiv Singh died on 31st July, 1997 while he was in employment. Late Sh. Shiv Singh made nomination in favour of the petitioner for receiving 95% of the amount of gratuity. Sh. Shiv Singh also executed a Will in favour of the petitioner to receive retiral dues. After death of Sh. Shiv Singh the petitioner claimed for the amount of gratuity and other retiral benefits, however, the same were not paid to him by the respondents, therefore, the petitioner preferred a writ petition before this Court which was decided by order dated 10.4.2001 directing the State Government to consider the claim of the petitioner and then to pass appropriate order. In pursuance of the direction given by this Court the respondent State passed an order dated 2.2002 stating therein that in light of decision No. 3 under Rule 59 of the Rules of 1996 a Government servant is required to submit the Will made by him during his life time on basis of which payment of retirement / death gratuity can be made. According to the order dated 2.2002 no such will was submitted by late Sh. Shiv Singh in his life time, therefore, gratuity and other retiral benefits cannot be given to the petitioner. 3. The petitioner has also given a challenge in the writ petition to decision No. 3 under Rule 59 of Rules of 1996. The decision No. 3 referred above reads as under : "3. Where a Will is made by a Government servant and it expressly authorises a person in the absence of the members of his family to receive Retirement/Death gratuity and is filed by the Government servant concerned in the department during his life time, then such a Will amounts to nomination for purpose of payment of Retirement/Death gratuity and accordingly Retirement/Death Gratuity is payable to such a person." 4.
From reading of decision No. 3 under Rule 59 of the Rules of 1996 it is apparent that the person named in a Will, which is required to be filed during life time of the employee, shall be treated as a person nominated for purpose of payment of retirement/death gratuity. From reading of Clause (3) it is also apparent that this decision can be operated where no nomination is made by the Government servant as required under Rule 59 of the Rules of 1996. In fact the decision No. 3 is like a deeming provision and according to it a person named in Will submitted by a Government servant during his life time authorises a person in the absence of members of his family to receive retirement/death gratuity shall be deemed to be nominated for getting the retirement/death gratuity. 5. In the present case late Sh. Shiv Singh nominated the petitioner in accordance with the Rules to receive retirement/death gratuity, therefore, there was no occasion for the respondent to decide the case of the petitioner under decision No. 3 referred above. The nomination made by late Sh. Shiv Singh was sufficient enough to make the payment to the petitioner as claimed. 6. In view of it the petitioner being nominated by late Sh. Shiv Singh to receive retirement gratuity/death gratuity is entitled to get the death gratuity from the respondents. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to release the amount of gratuity payable to late Sh. Shiv Singh in favour of the petitioner with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date on which the right to receive gratuity accrued in favour of the petitioner. 8. No orders as to costs.