Disposed

Saiyyada Bibi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC17 May 2023WRIA/3843/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner claimed family pension on the death of her mother, an Assistant Teacher. The court disposed of the writ petition, directing the District Basic Education Officer to decide the pending application within two months without commenting on rights.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file pending application before District Basic Education Officer within two months.

Saiyyada Bibi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:106945

¶2

Court No. - 36

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3843 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Saiyyada Bibi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shailendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Arun Kumar Pandey

¶5

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-Respondent No.1 and Sri Ashish Kumar Mishra, Advocate, under the Authority of Sri Arun Kumar, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2.

¶7

The petitioner herself claims to be the sole dependent of late Fizza Beghum wife of late Saiyyad Bashir Ahmed, who was working as an Assistant Teacher in Purv Madhyamik Vidyalaya Jhunsi, Bahadurpur, District Prayagraj and is stated to have superannuated on 30.06.1990, whereafter died leaving behind the petitioner as her sole heir and legal representative. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to family pension consequent to the death of her mother, who was being paid pension.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for the aforesaid purpose the petitioner has already preferred an application dated 31.01.2020 before the Respondent No.2, District Basic Education Officer, District Prayagraj, but the same is still pending consideration. He further submits that purpose of filing this writ petition would be served if directions are issued to the Respondent No.2, District Basic Education Officer, District Prayagraj, to pass appropriate orders on the pending representation of the petitioner.

¶9

Sri Ashish Kumar Mishra, Advocate, under the Authority of Sri Arun Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.2 submits that he have no objection to the aforesaid proposition.

¶10

Considering the submissions advanced, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the writ petition pending and the issue as regards the release of family pension to the petitioner consequent to the death of her mother can be better addressed by the District Basic Education Officer,

¶11

Prayagraj, at the first instance. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of expecting the Respondent No.2, District Basic Education Officer, District Prayagraj, seized with the application of the petitioner dated 31.01.2020, to pass appropriate orders thereon, after considering all aspects of the matter, strictly in accordance with law, preferably within a period of two months from the date of service of a certified copy of this order.

¶12

Needless to say that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner and it shall be open for the Respondent No.2 to pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law.

¶13

Order Date :- 17.5.2023 pks

¶14

Digitally signed by :- PAWAN KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Saiyyada Bibi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saiyyada Bibi v. State of U.P. and 3 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

Rajnikant Rai Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Vipin Kumar and 21 Others Vs Regional Manager Kendriya Bhandaran Nigam Lucknow and Another

Rajendra Kumar Vs Kshetriya Prabandhak Up and Another

Smt. Namita Chaurasiya Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Santosh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Om Prakash Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others