Gujarat High Court
The Chief Works Manager vs Shilaben Wd/O Shankarbhai Nanabhai ... on 9 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/21155/2019 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 21155 of 2019
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 21153 of 2019
================================================================
THE CHIEF WORKS MANAGER
Versus
SHILABEN WD/O SHANKARBHAI NANABHAI BARIA (HARIJAN) AND
GUARDIAN OF MINOR NIRALI, ISHA AND PRIYA & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MS ARCHANA U AMIN(2462) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR MS TRIVEDI(939) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4,6,7
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 09/07/2025
COMMON ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Ms. Archana U. Amin for the
petitioner and learned advocate Mr. M.S. Trivedi for the
respondent No.1. Though notice of this Court served upon
the respondent Nos.2, 3, 4, 6 and 7, they have choosen to
remain absent. Perused the record.
2. The present petitions are filed by the petitioners under
Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing and
setting aside the impugned judgment and order at
Annexture `A' contained in direction No.5 with respect to
payment of interest and also prayed to modify the direction
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/21155/2019 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
No.6 enabling the petitioners to recover the actual amount
of dues.
3. With the consent of learned advocates appearing for
respective parties, petition is taken up for final hearing
today.
4. The short facts arising from the record are as under :-
* The original applicant - present respondent No.1 filed
Civil Misc. Application No.10 of 2013 for appointment of
Guardian of minor children and Civil Misc. Application No.25
of 2018 for obtaining Succession Certificate of the movable
properties of deceased Shankarbhai Nanabhai Baraiya,
(Harijan) before the learned Principal District Judge, Dahod.
The applicant's case was that deceased Shankarbhai was
working as a Fitter Grade-III in Loco workshop, Freeland
Gunj, Dahod and he died on 16-02-2013 leaving behind the
present applicant as wife, original opponent No.1 being
mother of deceased and three minor daughters, namely;
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/21155/2019 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
Nirali, Isha and Priya. Minor daughters Nirali and Isha are
staying with opponent No.1 - mother, and minor daughter
Priya was residing with original applicant No.1 applicant -
mother. Application was filed by the wife claiming benefits
like salary, pension, insurance fund & provident fund, etc.
with interest from the Railway Authorities on 25-02-2013.
The opponent No.5, Vanitaben claimed to be the 2 nd wife of
deceased Shankarbhai also filed an application dated
7.3.2013 seeking benefits like salary, pension, insurance
fund & provident fund, etc. with interest from the Railway
Authorities. Since there was a dispute with regard to the
entitlement of the benefits from railway authorities, the
applicant was asked to get a certificate of succession
together with an order of guardianship from the competent
Court. Resultantly, aforesaid two applications came to be
filed by applicants. Upon service of notice of both the
proceedings, opponents appeared and filed their respective
written statements.
* The applicant examined herself at exhibit 56 in Civil
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/21155/2019 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
Misc. Application No.25 of 2018 and at exhibit 29 in Civil
Misc. Application No.10 of 2013. Opponent Nos.1 and 2 also
led their respective oral evidences at exhibit 46 and 115
respectively. Opponent also examined witness Rameelaben
Rajeshbhai at exhibit 48. Opponent No.4 railway authorities
also produced documentary evidence such as nomination
form for PF, GIS and DCRG, application of Shilaben
Shankarbhai at exhibit 88 and the calculation sheet of
benefit of late Shankar Bhai at exhibit 120. Railway
authorities also examined one Officer Mr. Amar Singh Sagar
at exhibit 86.
* After considering the evidence on record, the learned
Principal District Judge partly allowed both the applications.
Relevant portion of the order is reproduced hereunder:
"2. Applicant Shilaben, widow of Shankarbhai
Nanabhai Baria (Harijan) is declared as
guardian of minor Priya, daughter of
Shankarbhai Nanabhai Baria (Harijan) and
opponent No.1 Gangaben Nanabhai Baria
(Harijan) is declared as guardian of opponent
No.2 minor Nirali, daughter of Shankarbhai
Nanabhai Baria (Harijan) and opponent No.3
minor Isha, daughter of Shankarbhai Nanabhai
Baria (Harijan).
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/21155/2019 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
3. The Railway Department (opponent No.4) is
directed to give regularly monthly pension, as
per the Railway Services (Pension) Rules,
1993, in the name of applicant Shilaben,
widow of Shankarbhai Nanabhai Baria
(Harijan) only and from such amount of
monthly pension, applicant Shilaben will give
in equal portion, to opponent No.2 Nirali,
opponent No.3 Isha and Priya and thereby,
there will be four parts of pension of deceased
Shankarbhai, however, amount of monthly
pension shall be credited in the account of
applicant Shilaben only.
4. From all consequential benefits including
pension, arrears of pension, leave salary,
gratuity and others, the Railway Department
will give in equal portion to applicant
Shilaben, Priya, opponent No.1 Gangaben,
opponent No.2 Nirali and opponent No.3 Isha
and the cheques including the share of minors
will be issued in the name of respective
guardians.
5. The Railway Department is directed to give
all the consequential benefits with the
pension with interest at the rate of 7% p.a.
within two months from the date of this
Judgment, failing which, interest at the rate of
9% p.a. shall be given on such amount of
arrears.
6. The Railway Department is entitled to
recover the arrears of rent of Rs.3,02,019/
(Rupees Three Lakh Two Thousand and
Nineteen Only) from the arrears of
consequential benefits by way of deducting
50% from the arrears of applicant Shilaben
and 50% from the arrears of opponent No.1
Gangaben.
7. Succession Certificate be issued by the
Office accordingly. 50% charge of stamp
paper be paid by the applicant Shilaben and
50% to be paid by the opponent No.1.
8. A copy of this Judgment be sent to the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/21155/2019 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
Railway Authority for immediate compliance
and on expiry of two months, the Railway
Department shall submit compliance report in
writing in respect of direction, given by this
Court in this judgment.
9. The claim of rest of the opponents stand
dismissed with no costs.
10. A copy of this judgment be given to the
applicant and all opponents free of cost for
one time on demand.
11. This Judgment be circulated to all
appellate Judges of this District for kind
knowledge."
* Being agrrieved and dissatisfied with the granting of
interest at the rate of 7% per annum, applicant and
opponent Nos.1, 2, 3 on all consequential benefits and the
direction that an arrears of rent of Rs.3,02,019/- to be
recovered from the arrears of consequential benefits by
deducting 50% from the arrears of applicant Shilaben and
50% from the arrears of opponent No.1 - Gangaben, the
railway authorities have filed this petition.
5. Learned advocate Ms. Archana U. Amin for the petitioner
submitted that upon death of Shankarbhai Nanabhai
Baraiya, railway authorities were in the process of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/21155/2019 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
preparing the settlement dues as claimed by opponent
No.1 - Shilaben, however since there was a dispute
between Shilaben and the original opponent No.5
Vanitaben, who claimed to be the second wife of deceased,
the railway authorities did not make the payment and
waited the applicant to bring up necessary orders from the
competent Civil Court for the guardianship of minor
daughters as well as a succession certificate. It is further
contended that during the pendency of the application,
upon the request of opponent No.1, Vanitaben was sought
to be deleted from the array of parties and vide order
dated 4-5-2019, Vanitaben was deleted from the array of
parties.
6. It is also contended that the learned trial Court has wrongly
and illegally fastened a liability of 7% interest upon railway
authorities. It is further contended that the railway
authorities at no point of time denied the payment of
legitimate dues of deceased Shankarbhai. There was no
fault on the part of Railway Administrator of Railway
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/21155/2019 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
Authorities was already ready and willing to discharge its
duties but because of the litigation between the heirs of
deceased Shankarbhai, the amount could not be disbursed
by railway authorities. It is further contended that the
quarter was allotted to Shankarbhai during his service
tenure, however, after the death of Shankerbhai -
opponent No.1 retained possession of quarter and,
therefore, the railway authorities are entitlted to recover
Rs.3,02,019/- by way of arrears of rent. The deduction of
aforesaid amount from the amount of benefits is against
the Rules and Byelaws of the Railway Authorities and the
amount of arrears of rent cannot be adjusted towards the
benefits to be granted to the applicant as per Rules of
Railways. The quarter which was allotted to Shankarbhai is
not a subject matter of the service benefits post death.
7. Per contra, learned advocate for respondent Nos.2 to 4 has
supported the judgment and order and submitted that
though railway authorities have admitted that they were
under the process of disbursing the settlement dues,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/21155/2019 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
because of the dispute amongst the heirs of deceased,
railway authorities did not make the payment. The railway
authorities upon knowing the fact, a dispute has been
created amongst the heirs of the deceased ought to have
deposited the amount of benefits before the learned
District Court and could have absolved themselves from
the liability to pay interest. Had this amount been
deposited before the learend District Court, the said
amount could have fetched the interest by investing the
amount in Fixed Deposit. In absence of any contrary
material being pointed out by learned advocate for the
appellant, no intereference is required in finding of fact.
8. I have considered the submissions of learned advocates for
the respective parties and perused the record.
9. It appears that upon death of Shankarbhai, applicant who is
wife of deceased gave an application on 25.2.2013 seeking
retiral benefits of the deceased as mentioned hereinabove.
It appears from the order that a nomination form was filled
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/21155/2019 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
in by the deceased wherein the name of applicant Shilaben
was mentioned but on 8.12.2011, late Shankarbhai had
applied for issuance of medical identity card, wherein, in
the column names of family members, name of Vanitaben
is shown as wife. It appears that Vanitaben - original
opponent No.5 is claiming to be the 2 nd wife of deceased
Shankarbhai, however, during the pendency of the
proceedings, upon the application moved by opponent
Nos.1 to 3, Vanitaben was deleted from the array of
parties. No evidence is on record whereby it can be said
that Vanitaben is 2nd wife of deceased. The question under
consideration before this Court is with regard to the
settlement of liability of interest upon the appellant and a
direction to recover the arrears of rent from the
consequential benefits to be paid to the applicant and
opponent Nos.1 to 3.
10. Admittedly, there is no dispute raised by the railway
authorities with regard to non-entitlement of consequential
benefits pursuant to the death of Shankarbhai. The only
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/21155/2019 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
defence which has been taken by the appellant is that
because of the dispute amongst the heirs of deceased
Shankarbhai, the amount of benefits was not paid to its
rightful owner.
11. The railway authorities faulted in waiting for the outcome
of the dispute of entitlement of benefits. The railway
authorities could have deposited the amount of benefits
before the learned District Court so that future interest
liability could be avoided. Had the amount been deposited
before the learned District Court, the said amount could
have been invested in Fixed Deposit and the rightful
claimant would not have suffered loss of interest. The
learned District Court has adopted a reasonable approach
in awarding interest @ 7% per annum if consequential
benefits are not paid within 2 months from the date of
order. In case of failure on the part of appellant, interest @
9% per annum be paid to applicants on the amount of
arrears. The findings recorded by learned District Court on
granting of interest does not require any interference.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/21155/2019 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
However, the granting of 9% interest per annum on failure
to pay the consequential benefits is required to be set
aside and the appellant shall pay 7% interest per annum
on the consequential benefits as per the orders passed by
the learned District Court.
12. The undisputed fact which is surfacing on record is that
despite the fact that the quarter was allotted to
Shankarbhai during tenure of his service, had been
retained by the heirs of the deceased without any
justification and without any legal right. However, railway
authorities have failed to initiate any proceedings for either
recovery of arrears of rent or for possession of the quarter.
However, to meet with the ends of justice, learned District
Court has rightly ordered Railway Authorities to recover
arrears of rent of Rs.3,02,019/- from the arrears of
consequential benefits by way of deduction of 50% from
arrears of applicant Shilaben and 50% from the arrears of
opponent No.1 - Gangaben. No intereference is required in
such finding, more particulary when no material could be
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/21155/2019 ORDER DATED: 09/07/2025
undefined
pointed out by learned advocate for the appellant whereby
the direction of recovery of arrears of rent from the arrears
of consequential benefits be disturbed.
13. Resultantly, both these petitions are partly allowed.
Thereby, the impugned judgment and order is modified to
the extent that the order of interest to be paid @ 9% on
consequential benefits with the pension is hereby quashed
and set aside. Rest of the impugned judgment and order
remained unaltered. No order as to costs.
(D. M. DESAI,J)
vk
