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
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4393-DB
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:
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4393-DB
ORDER
The writ appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
HKV
CT;BN
