Allowed

Rakhi Kaushik v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC13 Apr 2022WRIA/12876/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the order stopping the petitioner's family pension. The court directed the continuance of pension payments and arrears from the date of cessation, reserving the issue of appointment legality for a departmental inquiry. Allowed writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the order stopping family pension; directed payment of arrears and future payments; reserved inquiry for respondents.

Rakhi Kaushik Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 32

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12876 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Rakhi Kaushik Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pradeep Singh Sengar, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3.

¶6

This petition has been filed praying for quashing of the order dated 31.08.2021 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Hapur, respondent no. 3. Further prayer has been made for directing the respondents to continue the payment of family pension to the petitioner.

¶7

The brief facts of the petition are that the petitioner is widow of late Tanuj Kumar, Assistant Teacher in Sardar Patel Junior High School, Pilkhuwa, Hapur, District- Hapur. Deceased, Tanuj Kumar, was appointed as Assistant Teacher in untrained grade of pay scale under dying in harness rules by the order of District Basic Education Officer, Hapur on 11.08.2019. The petitioner was given appointment letter on 12.08.2019 and at that time, he had completed B.Ed course and he was sanctioned the trained grade pay scale by the District Basic Education Officer on 30.12.2019. The petitioner died during the Panchayat Election duty on 08.04.2021. By the order dated 20.07.2021, family pension was directed to be paid to the petitioner by the Authorised Officer Pension, Meerut Division, Meerut. By the order dated 31.08.2021 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Hapur addressed to Senior Treasury Officer, Hapur, the pension of the petitioner has been stopped.

¶8

Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the District Basic Education Officer, Hapur, respondent no. 3, wherein it has been stated that the deceased-husband of the petitioner, Tanuj Kumar, obtained appointment without disclosing the correct facts since at the time of death of his father in harness, his mother was also working in an aided institution as Assistant Teacher, therefore, he was not entitled to get appointment on compassionate basis.

¶9

Counter affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 4 by Sri Y.S. Bohra, Advocate.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that an appointment on compassionate basis is always a substantive appointment and unless the appointment is held to be illegal on the basis of departmental proceedings, it cannot be made basis of denial of family pension to the widow of the deceased. Admittedly, no inquiry was conducted after issuing show cause notice to the deceased during his lifetime and after his death, his appointment is held to be illegal.

¶11

In view of the above consideration, the order impugned dated 31.08.2021 passed by District Basic Education Officer, Hapur is hereby quashed. Senior Treasury Officer, Hapur, District Hapur, respondent no. 4 is directed to make payment of the arrears of family pension of the petitioner from the date it was stopped and keep on paying the same.

¶12

It shall be open for the respondents to pass appropriate orders after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶13

The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent.

¶14

Order Date :- 13.4.2022 Rohit

¶15

Digitally signed by ROHIT DAS Date: 2022.04.21 18:35:44 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rakhi Kaushik v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakhi Kaushik v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nepal Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Sumitra Devi and 2 Others Vs M/S S.G. Rockbuild Pvt. Ltd. and Another

Niharika Devi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mihi Lal Since Dead and Now Rep.by. Bhikam Singh Vs Shyam Lal Since Dead and Now Rep. by.Shri Chhattarmal and Oth.

Sant Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Others

Bharat Prasad Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others