Disposed

Suparna Deb v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC8 Apr 2019WP(C)/1168/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed respondents to process the petitioner's family pension application within four weeks. If verification of her unmarried status is not completed, the cited government certificate must be accepted, and the pension paid within two months from the date of her mother's death, with liberty to act on contrary material later.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to verify petitioner's status in 4 weeks or accept certificate and pay pension within 2 months.

Suparna Deb Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010026532019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 1168/2019

¶5

1:SUPARNA DEB D/O LATE SUKHENDRA MOHAN DEB, C/O SRI SANJAY DEB KSHUDIRAM SARANI, SIBBARI ROAD, TARAPUR, P.O. TARAPUR, SILCHAR, PIN - 788003, ASSAM

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

1:THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS.

¶8

THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATION AND IT DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATION, SANCHAR BHAWAN, ASHOKA ROAD, NEW DELHI- 110001.

¶9

2:CHIEF MANAGING DIRECTOR BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED CORPORATE OFFICE 102-B STATESMAN HOUSE

¶10

148 BARAHHUMBA ROAD NEW DELHI- 1100011.

¶11

3:CHIEF MANAGING DIRECTOR BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM DIRECTOR BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED ASSAM TELECOM CIRCLE PANBAZAR GUWAHATI - 781001.

¶12

4:THE GENERAL MANAGER BSNL KAMRUP TELECOM DISTRICT

Page No.# 2/4

PANBAZAR

GUWAHATI - 781001.

5:THE GENERAL MANAGER BSNL SILCHAR SSA P.O. SILCHAR PIN- 788001

¶17

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G J SHARMA

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, BSNL

¶19

BEFORE

¶20

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. A.S. BOPANNA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI

¶21

08.04.2019

¶22

(A.S. Bopanna, C.J.)

¶23

Heard Mr. S Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. SC Keyal, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, for respondent No.1 and Mr. R Thadani, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5.

¶24

The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 11.7.2018 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (‘CAT’ for short) in OA No.040/00059/2017. Through the said order, the CAT has dismissed the application filed by the petitioner herein.

¶25

The petitioner was before the CAT seeking direction to the respondents to release the family pension payable to the petitioner with arrears at least from June, 2009 in terms of the Govt. order dated 6.9.2007 and the order dated 22.6.2010. The petitioner claims that she is the unmarried daughter of Late Sukhendra Mohan Deb who was employed as Telegraph Overseer in the office of the Department of Telegram Office (DTO), Silchar. The father of the petitioner had retired from service on 31.01.1986 and died on 12.09.2005. Subsequent thereto the mother of the petitioner, namely, Basanti Deb was sanctioned the family pension. However, she expired on 9.5.2009. It is in that light, the petitioner contends that she is entitled to the family pension as she is the unmarried daughter and she has no other income

¶26

Page No.# 3/4

¶27

from any source. In that regard, it is contended that as the Rule provides for payment of family to an unmarried and unemployed daughter, she is entitled to pay the family pension w.e.f. the date the same had ceased on account of death of her mother.

¶28

The CAT while taking note of such contention had also taken into consideration the submissions put forth by the learned counsel representing the BSNL. It is in that light, the CAT having taken into consideration that the deceased had not come on the records of BSNL, had declined consideration of the case of the petitioner herein.

¶29

However, what is necessary to be taken note is that the respondent No.1 does not dispute the position with regard to payment of family pension subject to the petitioner satisfying the condition of she being an unmarried and unemployed daughter of Late Sukhendra Mohan Deb.

¶30

In that regard, it is contended that if the necessary particulars relating to the same is furnished by the petitioner to the satisfaction of the respondent No.1, the papers would be processed and the benefit as sought by the petitioner would be accorded.

¶31

Learned Assistant Solicitor General would bring to the notice of this Court the certificate submitted by the petitioner dated 24.12.2009 issued by the Tarapur Gaon Panchayat where it is certified that the petitioner is the unmarried and unemployed daughter of Late Sukkhendra Mohan Deb. It is submitted that the said certificate is required to be verified and if what is certified therein is the correct position, the petitioner would be considered for payment of the family pension.

¶32

Having taken note of the same, since we also find that the said certificate has been issued as far back on 24.12.2009, the contention being put forth on behalf of the respondent No.1, at this juncture, with regard to the verification still pending, would not be justified. Even if that be the position, we find it appropriate to fix a time frame for the respondent No.1 to secure verification of the same in the meanwhile but, if the same is not done in the meanwhile, the certificate be accepted and the application of the petitioner for payment of the family pension be processed in that regard.

¶33

Hence, we direct the respondent No.1 to complete the process of verification within a period of 4 weeks from this day.

¶34

Page No.# 4/4

¶35

It is made clear that if the verification process is not completed within the period indicated above, the certificate dated 24.12.2009 shall be accepted and the application of the petitioner be processed and the decision in that regard be taken for payment of family pension immediately thereafter but, in any event, within a further period of 2 months.

¶36

The entitlement shall be considered from the date of family pension as remained unpaid after the death of mother of the petitioner.

¶37

Needless to mention that if any contrary material is received by the respondents even thereafter liberty to initiate action is left open.

¶38

In terms thereof, the petition stands disposed of.

¶39

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶40

Comparing Assistant

Suparna Deb v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suparna Deb v. the Union of India and 4 Ors.

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

Basiruddin Kazi and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Khukomoni Sinha and 5 Ors. Vs Abdul Hussain Choudhury and 10 Ors.

Smti Bhabani Baishya Vs Sri Manoj Kr. Nath

S.B.Rana and 50 Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

G/75069L Hav/Gd Amulya Kr. Lahon and 44 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

No 56620 H. Hav/Gd Nakul Swagiary and 15 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.