Judgment : 1. Though the matter is listed today for preliminary hearing, the petition is considered for final hearing having regard to facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The facts are as follows.- The petitioner is the widow of one M. Srinivas and the petitioners 2 and 3 are their twin sons. M. Srinivas, who was working as Group ‘D’ employee, in the establishment of the High Court of Karnataka joined service on 16-3-1992 and died on 18-6-2010, while he was working in the Accounts Branch II of the High Court. The petitioner-widow made an application in the prescribed form to the respondent on 23-7-2010, seeking sanction of family pension and other pensionary benefits. The respondent called upon her to furnish a survivorship certificate from the Tahsildar. The same was produced by her on 7-9-2010. It is also the petitioner’s case that she has passed S.S.L.C., and is aged about 37 years and is eligible for appointment on compassionate grounds. Accordingly, she has made an application in this regard as well. The petitioner was directed by letter dated 19-10-2010 to produce certain documents in support of her marriage with the deceased, in order to take further action. Thereafter, a letter was issued on 25-10-2010, directing the petitioner to furnish a Succession Certificate, in order to settle the pensionary claims, on the footing that since the records the disclosed that the deceased had nominated his parents, to receive the family pension and therefore, it was not possible to settle the pensionary benefits in favour of the petitioner. However, petitioner’s submission that the parents of the deceased had died in the years 1994 and 2000, respectively, drew no response from the respondent in respect of her claim. It is in this background, that the present writ petition is filed. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that, denial of pension, in the face of the circumstance that the names of parents of the deceased were mentioned in the service records would not by itself preclude the petitioner from claiming pensionary benefits, inasmuch as, the parents had predeceased the deceased employee and therefore, the widow-petitioner, by her very marriage was entitled to receive the pensionary benefits, notwithstanding the fact of the nomination of the parents of the deceased, even if they were alive as on the date of death of the deceased employee. In this regard, he draws attention of this Court to Rule 8 of the Karnataka Government Servant’s (Family Pension) Rules, 1964 and Rule 302(v-a) of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules which would indicate that, the petitioner, by virtue of marriage was entitled to be nominated, notwithstanding the fact the prior nomination of her parents-in-law and therefore, she would have the benefit of the rules. Further, the insistence on the part of the respondent for the petitioner to secure a succession certificate is wholly unnecessary, in view of Rule 1(3) of the Karnataka Government Servants (Family Pensions) Rules, 2002. This said exercise was not necessary and that the production of a survivorship certificate was sufficient, in case of claims by the legal representatives of a deceased Government employee and therefore, would submit that, the petition is allowed. 4. On the other hand, the learned High Court Government Pleader would make a weak attempt to resist the writ petition. 5. Rule 8 of the Karnataka Government Servants’ (Family Pension) Rules, 1964 and Rule 302(v-a) of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules and Rule 10(3) of the Karnataka Government Servants (Family Pensions) Rules, 2002 are extracted hereunder for ready reference. Rule 8 of the Karnataka Government Servants’ (Family Pension) Rules, 1964.- “8. Family pension admissible under these rules shall be sanctioned to the family of the deceased Government servant in the following order.- (a) Where the Government servant dies leaving him or her surviving a widow or widower, to such widow or as the case may be widower of the Government servant. (b) Where the Government servant dies leaving him or her surviving no widow or widower to the eldest minor son or minor daughter, if any, of the Government servant. (c) Where the deceased Government servant’s widow or widower to whom the family pension is sanctioned under sub-rule (a) dies or remarries, the family pension shall thereafter to be paid to the eldest minor son or unmarried minor daughter of the deceased Government servant, if any, on the date of the death or remarriage of the such widow or widower till such minor son attains the age of 18 years or such unmarried minor daughter marries or attains the age of 21 years whichever event occurs earlier”. Rule 302(v-a) of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules.- “302(v-a) Every nomination made by the Government servant before his marriage, shall automatically become invalid after his marriage and the nomination shall be deemed to have been made in favour of the husband or the wife as the case may be”. Rule 10(3) of the Karnataka Government Servants (Family Pensions) Rules, 2002.- “10 (3) In cases where the heads of office are able to decide that the claimant is entitled to the family pension under the rules on the basis of the information available with him, as up dated through local enquiry, the survivorship certificate from the revenue authorities need not be insisted upon. The Accountant General shall authorise the family pension to the member of the Family certified by the Head of the Office as the person entitled as per the rules. Provided that where there is a dispute or the particulars available are not sufficient to decide about entitlement of the claimant, a survivorship certificate shall be produced by the family of the deceased Government servant and the Accountant General shall not insist on the production of the death certificate in cases where the fact of death is recorded and certified in the service book of the deceased official by the Head of the Office”. From reading of the above rules, it is clear that the petitioner is entitled to be granted pensionary benefit, as claimed by her without further insistence of production of a succession certificate. 6. In view of the circumstances narrated above, the petitioner has already furnished a survivorship certificate issued by the Revenue Authorities as at Annexure-D. Accordingly, the impugned order, Annexure-K, dated 25-10-2010 bearing No. HCB/142/PEN/2010 is hereby quashed. The respondent is directed to settle and pay the pensionary benefit and family pension arising on the death of husband of the first petitioner and father of petitioners 2 and 3, on the basis of the records already produced by them. Further, since there is no response to the application made by petitioner 1, seeking appointment on compassionate ground in terms of Annexure-G, if the same is in time and in accordance with the Rules, the respondent shall also consider the same and pass appropriate orders. The petition is allowed accordingly. Further, since there is no response to the application made by petitioner 1, seeking appointment on compassionate ground in terms of Annexure-G, if the same is in time and in accordance with the Rules, the respondent shall also consider the same and pass appropriate orders. The petition is allowed accordingly. In view of lapse of time since the application was made by the petitioner, it is imperative for the respondent to settle the dues at the earliest, at any rate within four weeks, if not earlier, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.