Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1415 (AP)

Shaik Dilshad v. Superintending Engineer

2022-12-01

K.MANMADHA RAO

body2022
ORDER : 1. This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “......to declare the action of the respondents in not settling the family pension to the applicant for the last 13 years consequent on death of her husband Sri Shanwaz while in service on 31.10.2003 while working as Pump Mechanic in Puttur Mandal without any justification or reasonable cause under the guise of correspondence between the respondents is, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution and consequently hold that the applicant is entitled for release of family pension with effect from 1.11.2003 with all consequential benefits including revision of pension and pensionary benefits by fixing the pay of the applicants husband in 1999 and 2005 PRCs and also interest on belated payments of family pension apart from compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- for the mental agony suffered by the applicant all these years in the hands of the respondents and pass such other order or orders....” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the husband of the petitioner by name Sri Shaik Shanawaz was appointed as Mechanic of Bore well and while he was in service expired on 31.10.2003. He has two wives. The petitioner is the second wife. It is the case of the petitioner that the pensionary benefits of her late husband have not been sanctioned for several years due to disputes between the two wives and finally the disputes have been settled before the Lok Adalat, Putur in PLP No. 14 of 2013. To that effect, the petitioner is accepted to receive the family pension and leave the death benefits and any other amount to the first wife i.e. Smt Noorjahan. It is further stated that the petitioner made several representations to the respondents No. 1 and 2 including the District Collector, Chittoor to settle the family pension. However, the pension of the deceased has not been settled so far under the guise of correspondence between the respondents, which is illegal and arbitrary. Hence, the present writ petition. 3. Counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent denying all the allegations made in the petition and submits that Sri S. Shanwaz, Pump Mechanic was expired on 31.10.2003. However, the pension of the deceased has not been settled so far under the guise of correspondence between the respondents, which is illegal and arbitrary. Hence, the present writ petition. 3. Counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent denying all the allegations made in the petition and submits that Sri S. Shanwaz, Pump Mechanic was expired on 31.10.2003. As per the documents produced, he had two wives namely the first wife Smt S. Noorjahan and the second wife Smt S. Dilshad, who is the petitioner herein and both wives of the individual have compromised and a joint agreement was submitted for settlement for death benefits. It is further stated that compassionate appointment was given to the son of the deceased employee as Attender i.e. S/o S. Noorjahan, first wife of the deceased employee and as per the minimum pay Rs. 1875/- family proposals prepared in the name of Smt S. Dilshad, second wife of the deceased employee and submitted to the District Audit Officer, Chittoor. But the family pension has not been sanctioned and returned the above proposal as per Government Circular Memo No. 36840-A/329/A2/Pen.I/93 Fin. and Plg. Department, dated 11.09.1996 since the second wife is not entitled for family pension. It is further stated that the second wife of late Sri S.Shanwaz has made representations to the District Collector, Chittoor requesting to settle the family pension. As per the instructions of the District Collector, Chittoor the Superintending Engineer, RWS&S Circle, Chittoor has issued instructions to the Executive Engineer, vide Memo No. C4/WC/Estt/2008-09, dated 30.01.2012. As per the instructions of the Superintending Engineer, Chittoor, the E.E, RWS&S Division, Tirupati has put up the letter addressed to all the EEs, PR & RWSS Department in Chittoor district to furnish the attested copies of orders if any with a certificate of service verification for the period which the individual worked in their divisions and send the report to this office to built the Service Register of late Sri S.Shanawaz, Pump Mechanic. Further, the above officers sent the report stating that the above records are not traceable. Due to the said reason the Service Register is not possible rebuilt. So, the Service Register of the deceased employee is not in full shape, and the entries are pending in the 2nd respondent office. 4. Heard Mr. Further, the above officers sent the report stating that the above records are not traceable. Due to the said reason the Service Register is not possible rebuilt. So, the Service Register of the deceased employee is not in full shape, and the entries are pending in the 2nd respondent office. 4. Heard Mr. A. Sreedhar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-IV appearing for the respondents. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly the husband of the petitioner has expired while in service on 31.10.2003 and it more than 13 years since her husband has expired but the respondents have not released the family pension to the petitioner without any justification or reasonable cause on the ground of correspondence between the authorities. He further submits that strangely the respondents have already provided compassionate appointment to the son of the deceased as Attender and therefore there is no justification in not releasing the family pension to the petitioner on the untenable ground that the Service Register of the deceased is not found which is highly unjust and arbitrary. 6. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader while reiterating the contents made in the petition submits that as per the Award passed by Lok Adalat, Puttoor, the family pension proposals at the minimum pay basic Rs. 1875/- was prepared and submitted to the District Audit Officer, State Audit, Greamspet, Chittoor and the family pension sanctioned was to Smt S. Dilshad, the second wife of late S. Shanzawaz and the gratuity is also entitled to Smt. S. Noorjahan, the first wife of late S. Shanawaz as per PRC-1992. The PRC-1999 (w.e.f. 01.07.1998) and PRC-2005 (w.e.f. 01.07.2003) the minimum pay fixation and death benefits are pending due to non completion of Service Register at the time of working the previous stations pay particulars are not traceable. Further as per advice of Lok Adalat, Puttoor the Executive Engineer has issued instructions to the Deputy Executive Engineer, RWS&S Sub-Division, Satyyavedu-2 Puttoor. He further submits that the compassionate appointment was provided to Sri S. Khader Basha S/o Smt S. Noorjahan, the first wife of the deceased employee and the gratuity was also paid to the first wife as per the minimum pay of Rs. 1875/- of late Sri S. Shanawaz drawn pay at the time of his death. He further submits that the compassionate appointment was provided to Sri S. Khader Basha S/o Smt S. Noorjahan, the first wife of the deceased employee and the gratuity was also paid to the first wife as per the minimum pay of Rs. 1875/- of late Sri S. Shanawaz drawn pay at the time of his death. Family pension is also settled to Smt S. Dilshad, who is second wife of the deceased employee. Since there is no possibility to rebuilt the Service Register of late S. Shanawzaz, it is not possible to fix in minimum pay as per PRC-1999 (w.e.f. 01.07.1998) and PRC-2005 (w.e.f. 01.07.2003) some death benefits also pending due to non availability of service particulars and pay particulars at the time of working in the previous stations. In view of the above, prayed to dismiss the petition. 7. On hearing, this Court observed that the Government issued G.O.Ms. No. 202, dated 11.6.1982, wherein it was mentioned that where the service book itself is lost or is not traceable, in such cases once the date of appointment is established by independent direct evidence and affidavit given by the employee in respect of his service may be accepted along with such collateral evidence as may be produced by him. Further, the Government also amended Sub-Para (c) of Para 3 of Appendix to the A.P. Revised Pension Rules in G.O.Ms. No. 223 by adding Sub-Para (d) to the effect that in cases where the service register itself is lost or is not traceable, once the date of appointment is established with reference to direct independent evidence, and affidavit given by the employee in respect of his service duly supported by collateral evidence of contemporary employee, shall be accepted. 8. In the instant case, there is ample evidence about the appointment of the deceased employee as Pump Mechanic and subsequent transfers from one place to another till his death. However, the respondents are not settling the family pension to the petitioner for the last 13 years without any justification or reasonable cause. Surprisingly though the authorities are already directed to the Executive Engineer, RWS&S, Tirupathi, Chittoor District, to rebuilt the Service Register of the petitioner’s husband as early as during 2013, but the concerned officers are not taken any action and further expressed before this Court that their inability to rebuilt the Service Register of the petitioner’s husband. Surprisingly though the authorities are already directed to the Executive Engineer, RWS&S, Tirupathi, Chittoor District, to rebuilt the Service Register of the petitioner’s husband as early as during 2013, but the concerned officers are not taken any action and further expressed before this Court that their inability to rebuilt the Service Register of the petitioner’s husband. As such, the action of the respondents in not settling the family pension to the petitioner for the last 13 years consequent on death of her husband is highly unjust and arbitrary. This Court further observed that admittedly as the petitioner has suffering with severe financial crisis and eaking livelihood with meager income derived from doing tailoring and as the respondent authorities have dragging the matter for the last 13 years for no fault of her, to which, the petitioner is entitled for the relief as sought for. 9. In view of the foregoing reasons, the Writ Petition is allowed directing the respondents to rebuilt the Service Register of the petitioner’s husband and settle the family pension to the petitioner with all consequential benefits by fixing pay of the petitioner’s husband in 1999 and 2005 PRCs. The entire exercise shall be completed within three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 10. Further, the respondents are directed to pay interest @ 18% p.a. on belated payments of family pension to the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. 11. As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.