Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 633 (JHR)

Basanti Devi v. Union Of India

2017-04-04

APARESH KUMAR SINGH

body2017
ORDER Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. – Let the Allahabad Bank, Jasidih Branch, Deoghar through its Branch Manager be impleaded as Respondent no.7 in the instant writ petition, for which necessary correction shall be carried out by learned counsel for the petitioner in the array of parties during course of the day. 2. Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, State and the Union of India. 3. Petitioner is widow of Late Shridhar Dubey, a freedom fighter. Petitioner was getting pension from the Education Department of the State Government in lieu of services of her husband as Teacher in a Non Government Aided School. She was also receiving the freedom fighter pension under the SSS Pension scheme of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. As per the letter dated 27.2.2015(Annexure-9) of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, her pension from the Central Government under P.P.O No. 11574(POL) was suspended on the grounds that she is receiving pension from the State Government. She was asked to explain why the SSS dependent pension should not be cancelled and the amount wrongly received be not recovered. This aggrieved her to approach this Court with the prayer (1)(i) & (ii) herein asking for quashing of the letter dated 27.2.2015 and for resumption of the freedom fighter pension. Petitioner has also made a prayer for issuance of duplicate pension book which relates to the pension being received by her from the Education Department, Government of Jharkhand in lieu of service rendered by her husband as a Teacher. 4. Union of India in its counter affidavit have clarified the position as per the statement at Para 23, which is quoted hereunder:- "23. It is wrong and denied that the petition is filed bona fide and in the interest of justice. It is submitted that the answering respondent vide its letter dated 29.4.2016 had advised to review the case of Smt. Basanti Devi as per instructions issued vide this Ministry''s OM No. 45/03/2014-FF(P) dated 30.12.2015 and if found the petitioner eligible to receive the dependant family pension under SSS Scheme,1980. The Ministry vide its letter dated 29.0.4.2016 had issued directions to restore the dependant family pension in the light of this Ministry office memorandum No. 45/03/2014. FF(P) dated 30.12.2015 and 03.03.2016 w.e.f. the date of issue of the O.M dated 30.12.2015. The Ministry vide its letter dated 29.0.4.2016 had issued directions to restore the dependant family pension in the light of this Ministry office memorandum No. 45/03/2014. FF(P) dated 30.12.2015 and 03.03.2016 w.e.f. the date of issue of the O.M dated 30.12.2015. It is most respectfully submitted that the respondent no.1 has now received a letter dated 19.05.2016 from the Chief Manager, CPCC, Allahabad Bank, Lucknow that the Bank has received the Ministry''s letter no. 11011/20/CZ/2013-FF(B) dated 29.04.2016 and it is submitted that the Bank would be starting the pension w.e.f. May 2016. In view of the above, this writ petition is liable to be disposed of". 5. The Office Memorandum dated 30.12.2015 (Annexure-2) is also enclosed to the counter affidavit. The instant office memorandum has amended Para 6.1.2 of the revised policy guidelines for disbursement of Central Samman Pension to be followed by authorised Public Sector Banks, circulated by Ministry of Home Affairs, Freedom Fighter Division, Government of India as shown in letter dated 6.8.2014. The revised Para 6.1.2 along with the instructions issued to the respective Banks as contained in the instant office memorandum is quoted herein below:- "2. Thus as per the para 6.1.2 of the revised policy guidelines, the upper ceiling of monthly income was not uniform for Govt. and private source of income. To remove the above anomaly, the matter has been considered in consultation with Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance, Government of India and it has now been decided to amend the said para 6.1.2 of the revised policy guidelines by introducing a uniform income limit of Rs. 20,000/- per month or Rs.2,40,000/- per year irrespective of whether it is from Govt. or a private source. Accordingly, Para 6.1.2 of the revised policy guidelines will now be read as under:- 6.1.2 The banks must ensure that a dependent pensions is not sanctioned to a spouse or a daughter of a freedom fighter if:- (i) The spouse / daughter is already employed in a Central or a State Government, Central / State PSU or local body and income from such job/ activity exceeds Rs.2,40,000/- per year or Rs. 20,000/- per month. (ii) In case the spouse/ daughter is working in a private sector or having his /her own business/ activity then income from such job/ activity exceeds Rs.2,40,000/- per year or Rs.20,000/- per month. 20,000/- per month. (ii) In case the spouse/ daughter is working in a private sector or having his /her own business/ activity then income from such job/ activity exceeds Rs.2,40,000/- per year or Rs.20,000/- per month. (iii) The spouse / daughter is receiving a pension/ salary on account of his or her own job or by virtue of the previous employment of the deceased freedom fighter and income from such job/ activity exceeds Rs.2,40,000/- per year or Rs. 20,000/- per month 4. It is, therefore, requested to issue instructions to all concerned to follow these instructions scrupulously and take certificate from the dependents of the freedom fighters about amount and his/ her source of income at the time of transferring of pension and also at the time of taking life certificate annually. All the banks are directed to review/ reconsider all those cases in which pension had been stopped on the grounds of multiple pensions received by the dependent spouse/ daughter keeping in view the above income ceiling of Rs.2,40,000 per year (or Rs.20,000/- per month). If found eligible, the pension may be released with immediate effect". 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Respondent Bank after issuance of the amended guidelines restored the freedom fighter pension to the petitioner widow from November 2016. However, arrears of pension from April 2015 to October 2016 have not been restored though petitioner is fully eligible as per the amended Para 6.1.2(iii). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under the State Government petitioner is receiving less than Rs.20,000/- per month as pension. 7. So far as the prayer of the petitioner made in 1(iv) is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in Cont. Case(Civil) No. 219 of 2013 prosecuted for alleged wilful disobedience of the order dated 11.2.2013 passed in W.P.C. No. 2480 of 2012, learned Single Judge of this Court has been pleased to order that son of the applicant would be permitted to receive the reconstructed pension book of the petitioner, now 91 years of age. 8. Learned Government Advocate, Mr. Atanu Banerjee on instruction from the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar submits that the matter relating to issuance of duplicate pension book would be considered in accordance with law by the competent authority within a reasonable time. 9. 8. Learned Government Advocate, Mr. Atanu Banerjee on instruction from the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar submits that the matter relating to issuance of duplicate pension book would be considered in accordance with law by the competent authority within a reasonable time. 9. Consideration of all the background facts noted herein above, therefore, lead to the conclusion that pursuant to the amendment in para 6.1.2 of the revised policy guidelines, as incorporated in office memorandum dated 30.12.2015 also, the Bank has also restored the freedom fighter pension of the petitioner since November 2016, which was earlier suspended by letter dated 27.2.2015(Annexure 9). For consideration of the plea of the petitioner relating to release of freedom fighter pension for the period April 2015 to October 2016, in terms of the office memorandum dated 30.12.2015, quoted herein above, petitioner is directed to approach herself or through authorised representative before the Branch Manager of the Allahabad Bank, Respondent no.7 with a fresh representation for consideration and release of her arrears of pension. The competent authority under the Bank / Branch Manager, Allahabad Bank, Respondent no. 7 would consider the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law, her eligibility in terms of the SSS Pension Scheme and also amended para 6.1.2 of the revised policy guidelines as incorporated in office memorandum dated 30.12.2015 within a period of 4 weeks from the date of such representation. Petitioner is also at liberty to represent before the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar through herself or authorised representative for issuance of duplicate pension book bearing no. 169458, which may also be considered in accordance with law within a reasonable time and as per the directions contained in Cont. Case(Civil) No. 219 of 2013. 10. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.