Disposed

Km. Jyoti Kashyap Thru. Her Nominated Representative and Real Sister Uma Kashyap v. Central Bank of India Thru. General Manager Central Office and Another

Allahabad HC12 Sept 2025WRIA/10623/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition concerning family pension for a mentally disabled petitioner was finally decided. The court directed the respondent Bank to inform the petitioner of required documents within a week and process the claim within four weeks of receiving them.

What did the court decide?

Respondent-Bank directed to inform petitioner of required documents within one week and process the family pension claim within four weeks of receiving documents.

Km. Jyoti Kashyap Thru. Her Nominated… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 10623 of 2025

¶3

Km. Jyoti Kashyap Thru. Her Nominated Representative And Real Sister Uma Kashyap

¶4

.....Petitioner(s) Versus

¶5

Central Bank Of India Thru. Central Office And Another	General M	anager		.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Smt. Sinha	Maya	Sinha,	Shambhoo Nath
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Vijay	Krishna	Srivast	ava

¶6

Court No. - 4

¶7

HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sharad Kumar Shukla, Advocate who has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of all the respondnets.

¶9

With the consent of learned counsels appearing on behalf of the contesting parties, the instant writ petition is being finally decided.

¶10

Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner i.e Kumari Jyoti Kashyap is a mentally disabled lady as per the disability certificate issued by the Chief Medical Officer, Lucknow dated 14.07.2024, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the writ petition.

¶11

The petitioner claims family pension on account of her disability contending that her father Sri Ram Pal Singh was working in the respondent- Bank and died on 26.03.2024.

¶12

Sri Sharad Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent-Bank states that the application of the petitioner for being paid the family pension is being processed and the petitioner has been required to furnish certain documents and as soon as the documents as asked for by the respondent-Bank are submitted by the petitioner then her claim would be processed.

¶13

On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner states that all the

¶14

WRIA No. 10623 of 2025

¶15

¶16

documents as were required to be submitted have already been submitted.

¶17

Considering the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent-Bank to inform the petitioner about the documents which are required from her end within a week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The documents as are available with the petitioner would be submitted within next two weeks. In case, any such documents are not available with the petitioner, the reasons for the same would also be indicated by the petitioner.

¶18

Thereafter, the respondents shall process the claim of the petitioner for being paid the family pension in accordance with law and the relevant rules which process shall be done within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the said documents.

¶19

(Abdul Moin,J.)

¶20

September 12, 2025

¶21

Pachhere/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SATYENDRA SINGH PACHHERE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Km. Jyoti Kashyap Thru. Her Nominated Representative and Real Sister Uma Kashyap v. Central Bank of India Thru. General Manager Central Office and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Km. Jyoti Kashyap Thru. Her Nominated Representative and Real Sister Uma Kashyap v. Central Bank of India Thru. General Manager Central Office and Another

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Arvind Kumar Gupta Vs Bahrat Sarkaar, Karmik, Lok Shikayat Evam Pension Mantralay, Thru. Pramukh Sachiv

Shiv Bhushan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Mohan Prasad Sharma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Nagar Vikas Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Umesh Chandra Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Education U.P. Lko. and 5 Others

Chandra Bhan Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Finance Lko. and 5 Others

Rajdev Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Finance Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others