Allowed

Jyotiben Wd/O Pavankumar Israni v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC22 Feb 2019SCA/592/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a special civil petition praying for family pension and other retirement benefits for the deceased husband. Relying on Supreme Court and High Court precedents, the Court held the petitioner entitled to the benefits and directed payment with interest.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; Respondents directed to release family pension and other retirement benefits within three months; 7% interest on arrears if not paid.

Jyotiben Wd/O Pavankumar Israni Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gujarat HC (2019)

¶1

C/SCA/592/2019 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 592 of 2019

¶4

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

¶5

JYOTIBEN WD/O PAVANKUMAR ISRANI

¶6

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT

¶7

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

¶8

Appearance:

¶9

MRS KRISHNA G RAWAL(1315) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 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

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA

¶12

Date : 22/02/2019

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

2.The petitioner has prayed for directing the

¶18

Page 1 of 4

¶19

C/SCA/592/2019 ORDER

¶20

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
husband of the petitioner late Shri Pavankumar Israni
was serving as permanent Octroi Guard on the
sanctioned set up from December, 1990 under the
respondent No.2 Una Municipality, who died on 13th
December, 2012 while in service. It is the case that
by order dated 04th January, 1999 the husband of the
petitioner was absorbed in the regular set up as
permanent post with effect from 01st December, 1998.
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
husband of 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/592/2019 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/592/2019 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

Jyotiben Wd/O Pavankumar Israni v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jyotiben Wd/O Pavankumar Israni 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

Statutes considered

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

Deviben Wd/O Jivatram Tarachand Vs State of Gujarat

Firojkhan Jusabkhan Pathan Vs State of Gujarat

Jyotsnaben Wd/O Babubhai Jinabhai Vs State of Gujarat