Smt. Rekha Saxena vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1719 Chatt

                                             1




                                                                                NAFR

                    HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                 WPS No. 4156 of 2021
     Smt. Rekha Saxena Wd/o Late Shri N. R. Saxena Aged About 65 Years R/o
     Hd-168, Phase-3, Behind Gramin Bank, Kabir Nagar, Tatibandh, Raipur
     Chhattisgarh
                                                                      ---- Petitioner
                                          Versus
     1.      State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Transport Department,
             Indrawati Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur District Raipur
             Chhattisgarh
     2.      Additional Regional Transport         Officer   Rajnandgaon      District
             Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh
     3.      Accountant General Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh
     4.      Transport Commissioner Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh
     5.      Divisional Joint Director Treasury Accounts And Pension Durg District
             Durg Chhattisgarh
     6.      Treasury Office Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh
     7.      State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Transport Commissioner Gwalior
             Madhya Pradesh
                                                                  ----Respondents

     For Petitioner                   :     Mr. Vedant Bhelonde, Advocate
     For State                        :     Mr. Jitendra Pali, Dy. A.G.
     For Respondent No.3              :     Mr. Rajkumar Gupta, Advocate


                          Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
                                   Order on Board

12/08/2021

1. The present writ petition has been filed against the alleged delay and

inaction on the part of the respondents in finalizing the pension papers

of the petitioner upon the death of her husband and also for payment

of the balance of retiral dues, which she is otherwise legally entitled

for.

2. The brief facts relevant for the disposal of the present writ petition is

that the husband of the petitioner late N.R. Saxena was originally an

employee under the transport Department under the erstwhile State of

Madhya Pradesh. The petitioner's husband was working as an

Assistant Grade-III and was posted in the office of the Additional

Regional Transport Officer, Rajnandgaon upon being allocated to the

State of Chhattisgarh in November, 2000.

3. It is said that when the husband of the petitioner was posted at the

office of the Regional Transport Officer, Bhopal he was arrested in a

criminal case in 1995 for the offences punishable under Sections 379,

420, 467 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code. The services of the

petitioner was also placed under suspension. The order of suspension

subsequently was revoked on 03.05.2000 and the petitioner thereafter

upon the creation of the State of Chhattisgarh was allocated to the

State of Chhattisgarh in November, 2000. Since then he was posted in

the office of the Additional Regional Transport Officer, Rajnandgaon as

an Assistant Grade-III. The husband of the petitioner crossed the age

of superannuation w.e.f. 31.10.2008 and in due course of time the

husband of the petitioner also died on 05.04.2018.

4. Subsequent to the retirement of the husband of the petitioner, the

Department was paying provisional pension to the husband of the

petitioner. The petitioner's husband was also paid part of the gratuity

amount payable, pending the criminal case that was instituted against

him and which was pending adjudication before the Court of the

Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hoshangabad (Madhya Pradesh).

After the death of the husband, the petitioner since then has been

approaching the respondent authorities for the release of the full

family pension and also for the release of the other retiral dues

payable to her husband at the time of his retirement.

5. The respondent authorities in the State of Chhattisgarh however could

not finalize the same on account of the non-finalization of the criminal

case which was instituted against the husband of the petitioner.

Counsel for the petitioner makes a submission that once the husband

of the petitioner has died, the entire proceedings stands abated

without any final outcome and therefore she would be entitled for the

entire consequential benefits of retirement and also for full family

pension after the death of the deceased.

6. Having gone through the pleadings and documents enclosed along

with the writ petition, what is reflected is that, the husband of the

petitioner was one of the co-accused in the Criminal Case No.

493/2002 (Renumbered, the original number was of 1996). The

husband of the petitioner was initially arrested and subsequently was

released on bail and he was facing the trial as long as he was in the

State of Madhya Pradesh.

7. However, from the judgment passed by the Judicial Magistrate First

Class, Hoshangabad in the judgment dated 01.12.2015, it is reflected

that the husband of the petitioner has been shown to be an absconder

and therefore no decision as such has been passed so far as the

husband of the petitioner is concerned. The husband of the petitioner

was alive when the judgment of the Judicial Magistrate First Class,

Hoshangabad was passed. There does not seem to be any steps or

efforts made by the husband of the petitioner during his lifetime in

respect of the order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class,

Hoshangabad, wherein he has been shown to be an absconder. Thus

the criminal case in so far as the husband of the petitioner is

concerned is not yet concluded.

8. Given the said facts, as long as the husband of the petitioner was alive

he stood as an accused, and was shown as an absconder and who

had absconded during the course of the trial after his being released

on bail at the first instance. Subsequent to the death of the husband of

the petitioner no steps or efforts seems to have been made for taking

the criminal case which was instituted against the husband of the

petitioner to a logical conclusion. Under the circumstances as on date

also as per the records, the husband of the petitioner stands as an

accused and as an absconder from a Court of Law. Unless steps are

taken by the petitioner in this regard ensuring a logical conclusion to

the criminal case instituted against the husband, the State of

Chhattisgarh or for that matter the employer of the petitioner's

husband would find it difficult to process the finalization of the retiral

dues as also for the pensionary benefits.

9. Under the circumstances, it would not be proper for this Court at this

juncture to issue any direction to the authorities. The rights of the

petitioner stands reserved for taking necessary steps at the first

instance in getting the records of the criminal case, in which the

husband of the petitioner was an accused finalized and thereafter to

approach the respondents on the basis of the said findings or order

that would be passed by the concerned Criminal Court in respect of

the husband of the petitioner for finalization of the retiral dues as also

for pensionary benefits.

10. With the aforesaid liberty and the rights of the petitioner being

reserved to approach the authorities afresh at a later stage, the writ

petition as of now stands disposed of.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved