Allahabad High Court
Executive Engineer, Electricity ... vs Smt Nageshwari Devi And 3 Others on 28 June, 2021
Bench: Manoj Misra, Dinesh Pathak
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 40
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 388 of 2021
Appellant :- Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Division-Ii, Purvanchal Power Corporation Ltd. Ballia
Respondent :- Smt Nageshwari Devi And 3 Others
Counsel for Appellant :- Adarsh Bhushan
Counsel for Respondent :- Rajesh Kumar Srivastava
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
In Re: Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No.1 of 2021.
Heard Sri Adarsh Bhushan, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri R.K. Srivastava for the respondent no.1 and learned Standing Standing Counsel for the proforma respondents 2 to 4.
This special appeal is reported to be beyond time by 17 days. There is a delay condonation application with a supporting affidavit.
Considering the explanation offered in the affidavit, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay in filing the appeal. The delay condonation application is accordingly allowed. The delay in filing the appeal is condoned. The office shall assign regular number to the appeal.
Order on Appeal :
Heard Sri Adarsh Bhushan for the appellant and Sri R.K. Srivastava for the respondent no.1.
This intra court appeal arises from a judgment and order, dated 19th February, 2021, of a single Judge in Writ A No.1100 of 2020.
A brief narration of the facts would be appropriate to understand the controversy involved in this appeal. The husband of the 1st respondent was employed with the appellant. He superannuated on 30th June, 2006 from the post of Technical Grade-II and thereafter he died on 4th August, 2009. On his superannuation he was admitted to a provisional pension but regular pension and other retiral dues were awaited. On his death, the provisional pension also stopped. Claiming family pension, etc. the 1st respondent (petitioner in the writ petition) filed Writ A No.17120 of 2018, which was disposed off by requiring the Executive Engineer of the Corporation (the appellant herein) to look into the grievance of the petitioner and pass a speaking order. By order dated 27th April, 2019, the Executive Engineer of the Corporation rejected the claim of the 1st respondent on the ground that her husband had failed to reconcile certain revenue receipts amounting to Rs.76,20,531/- which amount would, therefore, be recoverable from his retiral dues.
Learned single Judge upon finding that since during the service tenure of the petitioner's late husband no proceedings were initiated against him either for disciplinary action or for recovery of any of the dues, the stoppage of pension to his widow would not be justified because it is not expected that she would be in any kind of a position to reconcile revenue receipts. The writ petition was thus allowed and the order dated 27th April, 2019 was set aside with a direction upon the respondent (the appellant herein) to forthwith release family pension to the petitioner and also release arrears of pension along with other dues that were admissible to the petitioner within specified period.
We made a pointed query to the learned counsel for the appellant as to whether a formal departmental enquiry by serving a charge sheet was initiated against the late husband of the 1st respondent during the course of his service. If not, whether after his retirement any permission of the nature contemplated under Regulation 351-A of the Civil Services Regulations or any other Rules or Regulations applicable was taken to initiate any such enquiry with a view to withhold or withdraw pension.
Sri Adarsh Bhushan, learned counsel for the appellant, very fairly stated that though it appears some letters were exchanged but neither a formal enquiry was initiated against the husband of the 1st respondent during the course of his employment nor permission to initiate any such enquiry, after his retirement, was obtained.
Once that is the position, we do not find a good reason to interfere with the order passed by learned single Judge.
The appeal is dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.6.2021.
Rks.
