Disposed

G. Krishna Kumari, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC11 Jul 2024WP/4676/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by an unmarried daughter for family pension after the death of the original beneficiary (her mother). The Court held she is eligible under Government Orders and the Andhra Pradesh Revised Pension Rules, directing respondents to consider her claim within six months.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to respondents to consider the petitioner's claim for allotment of family pension within six months in accordance with existing rules.

G. Krishna Kumari, Vs The State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

APHC010069172022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

[3310]

¶6

FRID A Y ,THE TWELFTH DAY OF JULY TWO T HOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 4676 OF 2022

Between:

G. Krishna Kumari,

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶14

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶15

1.POPURI LAKSHMI PRIYANVITA

¶16

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶17

1.GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING

¶18

2.M. VIDYASAGAR, ( STANDING COUNSEL FOR APGE N CO )

¶19

3.GP FOR SERVICE S I

¶20

4.K SWARNA SESH U

¶21

The Court made the following:

¶22

ORDER:-

¶23

This petition is file d under Article 226 of the Constitutio n of India for the

¶24

following relief:-

¶25

“to issue an or d er direction or writ more particularly one in the n ature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents particularly the 2ⁿ^d respondent the family pension is being paid to the mother of the petitioner t i ll her death

¶26

¶27

10.05.2017 in PPO No. 23-F-000338 though she unmarried daughter and eligible for family pension issuing any notice to the petitioner by stopping the family pension is illegal, arbitrary, malafide and violative of principles of natural justice and violative of articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently by directing the respondents to continue the payment of family pension to the petitioner and pass such other order or orders … …. ”

¶28

The precise case of the petitioner is that the father of the petitioner

¶29

Mr. Sanyasi Rao has worked as Accountant in the office of Upper Lower Silure Project Circle A.P.Genco O & M (LSHE), Motugudem, East Godavari District prior to his death. Thereafter family pension was received by the mother of the petitioner Smt. Chinna Butchamma vide PP No.23-F-000338 from 05.07.1971 to 09.05.2017 who is the original family pension beneficiary and she died on 10.05.2017. As per G.O.Ms.No.353, dated 04.12.2010 extending the benefit of family pension to the unmarried/ widow/ divorced daughter who are wholly dependent on the employee/ pensioner. The petitioner made several representations to the 2^nd respondent for sanction of extended family pension under the category of unmarried daughter, but the respondents did not take any action so far. Hence, inaction of the respondents is questioned in this writ petition and requested to allow the same.

¶30

Heard Smt. Popuri Lakshmi Priyanvita, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M. Vidyasagar, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 2 to 4.

¶31

During hearing learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contents urged in the writ affidavit and mainly contended that the petitioner is unmarried daughter of the employee, who died in harness. The family pension

¶32

¶33

was being received by the mother of the petitioner, till her death. After death of the mother of the petitioner in the year 2017, the respondents have discontinued the payment of family pension. It is further contended that the petitioner is suffering due to penury. Therefore, requested to allow the writ petition as prayed for.

¶34

Per contra, respondents 2 to 4 have filed counter-affidavit denying all material averments made in the writ affidavit and mainly contended that the 2^nd respondent has submitted the application of the petitioner to the Accountant General (A&E), Andhra Pradesh for further examination. The deceased person was not an employee of the erstwhile APSEB and no records or evidences available in the office. It is further contended that The family pension was sanctioned to his spouse Smt. G.Chinna Butchamma vide PPO.No.23-F-000338 of Accountant General (A&E), Hyderabad and Smt. Chinna Butchamma was also demised on 10.05.2017 while receiving the family pension at Srikakulam and Itchapuram Sub Treasury Office and no material evidence available in the office, since the case was about 51 years back. Therefore, it became extremely difficult to attend the remarks sought by the Accountant General (A&E) for sanctioning the extended family on account of unmarried daughter. Therefore, the petitioner was advised to approach the office of the Accountant General (A&E), Andhra Pradesh for further action. Further, the petitioner has not submitted any proofs against deceased employee. Therefore no pension has been sanctioned. Therefore, the writ petition is misconceived, devoid of any merit and is liable to be dismissed.

¶35

¶36

Perused the record.

¶37

The petitioner has produced non-remarriage Certificate with self declaration dated 25.09.2017 showing that his father Mr. G. Sanyasi Rao died on 04.07.1971 and she is dependent on her mother G. Chinna Buchamma, who died on 10.05.2017. As on date, the petitioner is not married and she is aged 54 years without having any pension since 2017. Due to which she is struggling for existence and several representations were made to the respondents to allot family pension to her, but in vain.

¶38

The petitioner has also placed on record the No earning Member Certificate dated 25.09.2017 issued by the Tahsildar, Ichapuram would show that the petitioner is having any source of income and she is only family member of the deceased Gunupuru Chinna Buchamma. The petitioner had relied on a decision of this Court in “ G.V.Seshamamba and 8 others v. The

¶39

State of Andhra Pradesh rep., by its Principal Secretary, Finance (HR III-

¶40

Pension) Department”¹ , wherein it was held as follows:-

¶41

“ As seen from the material on record, the Andhra Pradesh Revision Pension Rules were framed only by exercising power under Article 309 of the Constitution of India as these rules pertaining to service conditions of Government employees to claim pension after retirement since family pension is now welfare scheme framed to provide relief to the widow spouse and children of deceased employee or pensioner, including widowed or divorced daughter.

¶42

The eligibility to claim family pension and the procedure for payment of family pension is totally governed by the rules framed by the State

¶43

1 Indiankanoon.org/doc/19193905/ = W.P.Nos. 19671 of 2020 and batch, dated 05.03.2021

¶44

¶45

legislature known as the Andhra Pradesh Revised Pension Rules 1980. These rules are statutory in nature.

¶46

Therefore, the petitioner is undisputedly unmarried daughter of Chinna Buchamma. The said Chinna Buchamma has drawn pension till her death. Therefore, the petitioner is the dependent on her and hence she made a request to allot family pension to the petitioner. Whereas, the respondents vehemently argued that there was no records available in the office and also the petitioner has not furnished any records for allotment of family pension to her. Hence, the respondents are unable to process for allotment of pension.

¶47

As could be seen from the entire material on record, the petitioner is eligible for family pension in the light of decision cited supra. Further, since 2017 the petitioner is starving for existence without any pension. Therefore, it is necessary to allot family pension to the petitioner by the respondents at the earliest.

¶48

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submissions of both the counsel, the petitioner is directed to furnish her own details only to the respondents for allotment of family pension at the earliest. On such submission, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for allotment of family pension in accordance with existing rules, within six (06) months thereafter, by taking into consideration of the particulars of Smt. G.Chinna Butchamma vide PPO.No.23-F-000338 of Accountant General (A&E), Hyderabad, which is sufficient to grant pension to the petitioner.

¶49

¶50