Disposed

Maani Biswal v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC2 May 2023WP(C)/1808/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner claims family pension after husband's death but a coordinate order involved another claimant. Court directed authorities to notice both claimants, hear them, and decide entitlement via a reasoned order within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to opposite party no.3 to notice Arati Biswal, conduct a hearing, decide entitlement, and pass a reasoned order within two months.

Maani Biswal Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.1808 of 2022

¶3

Maani Biswal

¶4

…. Petitioner Mr.Ramakanta Sahoo, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha & others

¶7

…. Opposite Parties

¶8

Mr.Saswat Das, A.G.A. Mr.S.K.Patra, Standing Counsel for A.G. Odisha

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

02.05.2023

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate. Perused the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.

¶17

The present Writ Petition has been filed with the following prayer.

¶18

“ It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court would graciously be pleased to Admit the Writ Petition, call for the relevant records and issue Rule NISI calling upon the Opp.Parties to show cause as to why the prayer of the Petitioner in the Writ Petition be not allowed, and if the Opp.Party Authorities fail to show cause or show insufficient cause, the said Rule be made absolute;

¶19

And may be pleased to command the Opp.Party Authorities to sanction and grant the benefits of family pension as well as DCRG and other benefits to the Petitioner after the death of her husband who was an employee with them within a stipulated time frame, by issuing a writ in the nature of Mandamus;

¶20

And the Authorities may further be restrained from issuing any such orders or direction so as to release or disburse any financial benefits owing to or in relation to the death of the deceased employee in favour of the Opp.Party No.5 and furthermore the Opp.Party No.5 be

¶21

// 2 //

¶22

specifically directed to refund the amount to the Petitioner if she has received any amount of the benefits from the Authorities in the meantime by issuing Writ in an appropriate nature;

¶23

And may further be pleased to issue any other Writ(s)/Order(s)/Direction(s) deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case;

¶24

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is the legally married wife of one late Mathuri Biswal. The above named Mathuri Biswal was serving as a Khalasi in the Office of the Assistant Engineer, Public Health Maintenance Sub-Division, Bhubaneswar since the year 1995. Subsequently, his service was upgraded to Masson and was posted in the Office of Superintending Engineer, P.H.Division, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar. While he was in the aforesaid service, the husband of the Petitioner died in harness on 26.08.2020 at Sanjibani Hospital, Bhubaneswar under COVID-19. At the time of death of the deceased employee, he was survived with his wife and two sons namely, Manoranjan Biswal and Satyajit Biswal and one married daughter namely Truptipriya Nayak. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that the elder son of the deceased Government employee performed the last rites. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that after the death of the husband of the Petitioner, the Petitioner intimated the aforesaid fact to the authority immediately to avail the death cum survival benefits as well as the family pension. While the pension papers were being prepared in favour of the Petitioner, the Petitioner came to learn that Opposite Party No.5 claiming herself as wife of the husband of the present Petitioner, lodged a claim before the authorities demanding the service benefits as is due and admissible to the late husband of the Petitioner namely, Mathuri Biswal. He further contended that thereafter the Petitioner represented the Opposite Party no.3 on 20.11.2020 by filing a representation under Annexure-3. Since nothing has been done, the

¶25

// 3 //

¶26

Petitioner approached the Senior Civil Judge, Bhubaneswar and obtained succession Certificate in Intest Case No.07 of 2020. Thereafter, along with such succession certificate, the Petitioner again resubmitted death certificate and other relevant documents before the Opposite Party No.2 for grant of service benefit as well as the pensionary benefit as is due and admissible to the late husband of the Petitioner.

¶27

While this was so, the Opposite Party No.5 approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.33068 of 2021 for a direction to the authorities to release the family pension , DCRG and other arrear benefits payable to late Mathuri Biswal in her favour. A coordinate bench of this Court dated 02.11.2021 disposed of the aforesaid writ application with a direction to the Petitioner to file a representation before the authority which shall be considered in accordance with law within a period of three months. Learned counsel or the petitioner further contended that pursuant to the order passed on 02.11.2021 passed in W.P.(C) No.33068 of 2021 the Opposite Party No.2 has sought for clarification. Since there is a delay in considering the case of the Petitioner, the Petitioner has not been granted pensionary benefit as is due and admissible to the Petitioner. Accordingly, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present Writ Application.

¶28

Learned Additional Government Advocate on the other hand submitted that the Opposite Parties are facing difficulties since there are two claimants in respect of one Government employee. He further contended that earlier Arati Biswal, who was claiming to be the wife of the deceased Government employee filed W.P.(C) No.33068 of 2021 which was disposed of by a coordinate bench of this Court by directing the opposite Parties to consider the representation. So far as the present Petitioner is concerned, she has also approached the Opposite parties for grant of service as well as consequential benefits as is due and

¶29

// 4 //

¶30

admissible to late Mathuri Biswal. The matter is pending before the authority and the Opposite parties is not taking any decision so far. Further, it is submitted by the learned Additional Government Advocate that in the event this Court directs the Opposite parties to consider the claim of the present Petitioner as well as Arati Biswal in W.P.(C) No.33068 of 2021 by providing opportunity to both of them. In such eventuality he has no objection.

¶31

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties as well as on examination of the factual documents of the present case, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the Writ Petition by directing the petitioner to approach the opposite party no.3 along with certified copy of this Court within two weeks from today. In the event the Petitioner approaches the Opposite party No.3, the Opposite Party No.3 shall do well to give notice to Arati Biswal, Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.33068 of 2021 and after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the above named Arati Biswal and shall take a final decision in the matter by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The opposite party No.3 is directed to decide the entitlement basing on the documents to be produced by the abovenamed parties before the Opposite Party no.3 and release of pensionary benefit shall depend upon the final decision of Opposite party No.3 with regard to entitlement of such financial as well as pensionary benefit in accordance with law.

¶32

8 Let the entire exercise as directed be carried out within two months from the date of communication of the order.

¶33

With the aforesaid observation/direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶34

RKS

¶35

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge

¶36

// 5 //

Maani Biswal v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maani Biswal v. State of Odisha

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

Rasmita Kumari Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Chandaneswar High School, Garhkharad Vs State of Odisha

Rajesh Kumar Mohapatra Vs State of Odisha

Secretary, Odisha Sub-Ordinate Staff Selection Commission(Osssc) Vs Bhagabata Malla

Susanta Kumar Swain Vs State of Odisha(Vig.)

Bhagirathi Naik Vs State of Odisha