Allowed

Deviben Wd/O Jivatram Tarachand v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC22 Feb 2019SCA/475/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petition praying for release of family pension and retirement benefits. Relying on Supreme Court and High Court precedents, the court held the petitioner entitled to benefits under the 6th Pay Commission, leave encashment, and higher pay-scale, directing payment within three months with 7% interest on arrears.

What did the court decide?

Order to release family pension, retirement benefits (6th Pay Commission, leave encashment, higher pay-scale), pay arrears with 7% interest within three months.

Deviben Wd/O Jivatram Tarachand Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gujarat HC (2019)

¶1

C/SCA/475/2019 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 475 of 2019

¶4

==========================================================

¶5

DEVIBEN WD/O JIVATRAM TARACHAND

¶6

Versus

¶7

STATE OF GUJARAT

¶8

==========================================================

¶9

Appearance:

¶10

MRS KRISHNA G RAWAL(1315) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 1) Advocate Not Given (MA) for the Respondent(s) No. 3 MS DIVYANGNA JHALA, AGP (1) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR GM JOSHI(370) for the Respondent(s) No. 2

¶11

==========================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA

¶13

Date : 22/02/2019

¶14

ORAL ORDER

¶15

In the facts and circumstances of the case
and having regard to the consent and request of the
parties appearing through their respective learned
advocates, the petition was taken up for final
consideration today.

¶16

1.1Rule,returnableforthwith. Learned
Assistant Government Pleader Ms.Divyangna Jhala
waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of
respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4 whereas learned advocate
Mr.Gautam Joshi waives service of notice of Rule on
behalf of respondent No.2 Municipality.

¶17

1.2Heard learned advocate Ms.Krishna Rawal for
the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader
for the respondent – State and its authorities and
learned advocate for respondent No.2.

¶18

Page 1 of 4

¶19

C/SCA/475/2019 ORDER

¶20

2.The petitioner has prayed for directing the
respondent authorities to release family pension and
other retirement benefits including higher pay-scale,
leave encashment as well as the benefits of 6th Pay
Commission which are available to all other similarly
situated employees. It is further prayed to pay the
arrears of family pension and retirement dues with
interest.

¶21

3.It is the case of the petitioner that her
husband was working as Octroi Guard on regular set up
as permanent employee with the respondent No.1
Municipality from 01st December, 1998. He was absorbed
in sanctioned set up and regular pay-scale vide
office order dated 04th January, 1999 with effect from
01st December, 1998. He was on the regular set up of
the Municipality. At that time he gave option form
for pension and submitted his option. He has been
governed by GPF Scheme. The petitioner has produced
copy of GPF Slip. The averments remained
uncontroverted that the petitioner stands covered
under the GPF Scheme.

¶22

4.At the time of issuance of notice, it was
observed that the issue involved in the petition is
covered by the decision of the Apex Court in Una
Nagarpalika v. Kaliben Balubhai Makwana [JT 2018 (9)
SC 336] which was followed by this Court in Babugiri
Somgiri Goswami v. State of Gujarat being Special
Civil Application No.17034 of 2017 decided on 27th
December, 2018.

¶23

Page 2 of 4

¶24

C/SCA/475/2019 ORDER

¶25

4.1When the petition came up for consideration
today, learned advocate for the respondents could not
dispute the applicability of the position of law
emerging and applying from the aforesaid decision to
the case of the petitioner.

¶26

5.Resultantly, the deceased employee was
entitled to pension and the petitioner who is widow,
would be consequentially entitled to family pension.
As a result of above, present petition deserves to be
allowed. Respondent authorities are directed to
release family pension and other benefits including
higher pay-scale, leave encashment and the benefits
flowing from the 6th Pay Commission Recommendation to
the petitioner. The respondent authorities are
directed to pay all such amount within a period of
three months from the date of receipt of writ of this
order. If the amount of arrears is not paid within
the time stipulated above, it shall carry interest at
the rate of 7% from the date of filing of the
petition. The petition is allowed accordingly.

¶27

6.The liability to pay the family pension
amount and the dues arising as above shall be upon
the State Government as per the decision of the
Division Bench of this Court in Mariyaben v. State of
Gujarat being Miscellaneous Civil Application No.425
of 2018 in Special Civil Application No.12181 of 2015
wherein resolving the controversy as to whether the
State would bear the financial burden or Nagarpalika
would pay the amount from its own fund it was held
that liability to pay the pension would be upon the

¶28

Page 3 of 4

¶29

C/SCA/475/2019 ORDER

¶30

State.

¶31

7.The petition is allowed accordingly. Rule is
made absolute.

¶32

(N.V.ANJARIA, J)

¶33

Anup

¶34

Page 4 of 4

Deviben Wd/O Jivatram Tarachand v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deviben Wd/O Jivatram Tarachand v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nandlalbhai Manishankarbhai Pandya Vs the State of Gujarat

Jani Asmitaben Batukrai Vs Director of Primary Education

Jiteshbhai Bhagwanjibhai Pansuriya Vs State of Gujarat

Jyotiben Wd/O Pavankumar Israni Vs State of Gujarat

Firojkhan Jusabkhan Pathan Vs State of Gujarat

Jyotsnaben Wd/O Babubhai Jinabhai Vs State of Gujarat