Saraswati vs The Union Of India And Ors

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 15033 Kant
Judgement Date : 28 June, 2024

Karnataka High Court

Saraswati vs The Union Of India And Ors on 28 June, 2024

                                                 -1-
                                                   NC: 2024:KHC-K:4393-DB
                                                        WA No. 200011 of 2022




                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                                        KALABURAGI BENCH

                              DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

                                              PRESENT

                             THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
                                                AND
                               THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

                              WRIT APPEAL NO. 200011 OF 2022 (S-R)

                      BETWEEN:

                      SARASWATI
                      W/O LATE GNYNI
                      AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD,
                      R/O 9-5-616 CHIDRI ROAD,
                      IRANI GALLI BADRUDDIN COLONY, BIDAR,
                      TQ. AND DISTRICT: BIDAR-585401.

                                                                    ...APPELLANT
                      (BY SRI. JAIRAJ K. BUKKA, ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by
                      AND:
BASALINGAPPA
SHIVARAJ
DHUTTARGAON
Location: HIGH
COURT OF              1.   THE UNION OF INDIA
KARNATAKA
                           MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
                           REP BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY,
                           RAIL BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-100 011.

                      2.   THE SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAYS
                           REP BY ITS DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER,
                           PERSONNEL BRANCH IV FLOOR,
                           SANCHALAN BHAVAN,
                           SECUNDERABAD -500003
                           (TELANGANA STATE).
                            -2-
                             NC: 2024:KHC-K:4393-DB
                                    WA No. 200011 of 2022




3.    THE GENERAL MANAGER
      PERSONNEL BRANCH SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY,
      SECUNDRABAD - 500 003
      (TELANGANA STATE).

4.    THE DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER
      SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY
      NANDED - 431 605
      (MAHARASTRA STATE).

5.    THE PERMANENT WAY INSPECTOR
      SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY,
      BIDAR-585401.

                                         ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SUDHIRSINGH R. VIJAPUR, DSGI FOR R1 TO R5)

       THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURTS ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE
APPEAL SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE
LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION 201633/2019
DATED 21.12.2020 AND ALSO THERE BY PLEASED TO QUASH
THE    IMPUGNED   COMMUNICATION     PASSED   BY   THE   2ND
RESPONDENT VIDE NO.SCR/P-SC/665/HYPA/2018/N- DATED
09.07.2018, WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE-M, AND SUBSEQUENTLY
ISSUE THE DIRECTION THE 2ND RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER
THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE APPELLANT ON DATED
29.11.2000 VIDE ANNEXURE-H AND ANNEXURE- L DATED
12.05.2018, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.



       THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS    DAY   ASHOK   S.   KINAGI    J.,   DELIVERED    THE
FOLLOWING:
                                -3-
                                 NC: 2024:KHC-K:4393-DB
                                       WA No. 200011 of 2022




                         JUDGMENT

This writ appeal is filed challenging the order dated 21.12.2020 passed in W.P.No.201633/2019 by the learned Single Judge wherein the petitioner has filed the writ petition seeking for mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to consider Annexure-M and pass appropriate order and also to consider representations, produced at Annexures-H and L in the writ petition.

2. It is the case of the appellant that, the husband of the appellant was appointed and worked as a Gangman in the office of respondent No.5 from 01.01.1983 and later, he was absorbed in the service as regular employee in the year 1992. It is further contended that the husband of the appellant died on 21.06.1996. After the demise of her husband the appellant submitted a representation dated 29.11.2000 seeking pension which came to be rejected vide order dated 09.07.2018 on the ground that the husband of the appellant had not worked for minimum -4- NC: 2024:KHC-K:4393-DB WA No. 200011 of 2022 of ten years for net qualifying service as required under law. The respondent-authorities issued Annexure-M dated 09.07.2018 rejecting the representation made by the petitioner seeking family pension. The appellant aggrieved by the order of rejection vide Annexure-M filed a writ petition. The learned Single Judge after considering the material on record, dismissed the writ petition holding that the rule does not permit for providing family pension to the appellant on the ground that the husband of the petitioner therein did not put in minimum service of 10 years while he was alive. Hence, there is no merit in the writ petition.

3. The learned Single Judge placing the reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of Smt.Channamma vs. Union of India and Others reported in 2020 (3) KCCR 2185 has rightly dismissed the writ petition. We do not find any error in the impugned order. Accordingly, we decline to interfere with the impugned order and proceed to pass the following: -5-

NC: 2024:KHC-K:4393-DB WA No. 200011 of 2022 ORDER The writ appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE HKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13 CT;BN