Karnataka High Court
Shyamala Devi @ Jayamma vs State Bank Of India on 13 January, 2025
Author: S.G.Pandit
Bench: S.G.Pandit
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:1439
WP No. 32185 of 2019
C/W WP No. 30293 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
WRIT PETITION NO. 32185 OF 2019 (S-R)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 30293 OF 2019 (GM-RES)
IN WP NO. 32185/2019
BETWEEN:
SHYAMALADEVI @ JAYAMMA
W/O LATE NEELAKANTHA SHASTRY,
EX.JC 131/227K
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
R/AT NO.655, 19TH MAIN
4TH CROSS ROAD, VIDYARANYAPURA
MYSURU-570007
PPO NO.022629 ARMY
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.T.H.AVIN, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed
by AND:
MARIGANGAIAH
PREMAKUMARI
1. INTEGRATED HQ OF MOD(ARMY)
Location: HIGH ADJUTANT GENERAL'S BRANCH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA ADDL DTE GEN PERSONNEL SERVICES
PLOT NO.108(WEST), BRASSE AVENUE,
CHURCH ROAD
NEW DELHI -110051
REPRESENTED BY RECORD OFFICER
ALSO AYUDH MASTER GENERAL
2. ARMY RECRUITMENT OFFICE (ARO, BENGALURU)
DEPT OF SAINIK WELFARE AND RESETTLEMENT,
MYSORE
# 58, FIELD MARSHAL CARIAPPA BHAWAN
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:1439
WP No. 32185 of 2019
C/W WP No. 30293 of 2019
FIELD MARSHALL CARIAPPA ROAD,
BANGALORE -560025
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
ZILLA SAINIK WELFARE OFFICE,
JLB ROAD, MYSURU,
SQDN LDR AB DEVAIAH BHAVAN
NEAR DEPUTY COMMISIONERS OFFICE
JLB ROAD, MYSORE-570005
4. THE COMMANDANT
EME OFFICE
UNNAMED ROAD,
MARUTI NAGAR COLONY
TRIMULGHERRY
SECUNDERABAD-500015
5. AKKAMAHADEVI @ SHAMALADEVI
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS
6. ARATI
D/O AKKAMAHADEVI @ SHAMALADEVI
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
BOTH ARE R/AT NO.547,
C/O BOREGOWDA,
II BLOCK, 19TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN,
YELWALA, MYSORE TALUK.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.MADANAN PILLAI.R, CGC FOR R1 TO R4;
SRI. LOKESH.D.K, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI.P.NATARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R5 & R6)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE ANNEXURE-A
DATED 6TH JUNE 2019 SIGNED BY RAJEEN SANAN LTD COL,
RSO TO DG EME AND ANNEXURE-A1 DATED 1.12.2018 SIGNED
MAJ. SENIOR RECORD OFFICER, FOR OIC RECORDS NOT
BINDING AND ETC.,
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:1439
WP No. 32185 of 2019
C/W WP No. 30293 of 2019
IN WP NO. 30293/2019
BETWEEN:
SHYAMALA DEVI @ JAYAMMA
WIFE OF LATE NEELAKANT SHASTRY
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.655,
19TH CROSS ROAD,
4TH MAIN ROAD, VIDYARANYAPURA
MYSURU-570007
AND ALSO AT
NO.178, BELAVADI VILLAGE
MYSURU TALUK
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.T.H.AVIN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE BANK OF INDIA
KUVEMPUNAGAR BRANCH
KUVEMPUNAGAR, MYSURU
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER
...RESPONDENT
RESPONDENT SERVED
THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT TO
RESPONDENT TO PAY FAMILY PENSION AMOUNT TO
PETITIONER BY CREDITING TO PETITIONER'S ACCOUNT
NUMEBER 54027454045 MATAINED WITH RESPONDENT.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE
THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:1439
WP No. 32185 of 2019
C/W WP No. 30293 of 2019
ORAL ORDER
In both the writ petitions, the petitioner and
respondents are one and the same and the subject matter
relates to sanction of pension and its recovery. Hence,
both the writ petitions are taken up together and disposed
of by this common order.
2. Heard learned counsel Sri.Avin T.H. for petitioner in
both the writ petitions, Sri.Madanan Pillai R., learned CGC
for respondent Nos.1 to 4 as well as Sri.Lokesh D.K. for
Sri.P.Nataraju, learned counsel for respondent Nos.5
and 6. Perused the writ petition papers.
3. In the present writ petitions, both petitioner as well
as respondent Nos.5 and 6 claim that they are the legal
heirs of one Late Neelakant Shastry who was working in
Indian Army as Sub-Major (JC-131227K Ex Sub-Major)
with the first respondent. It is stated that the said
Neelakant Shastry died on 13.06.2009. On the death of
said Neelakant Shastry, initially family pension was
sanctioned in favour of the petitioner. During the lifetime
NC: 2025:KHC:1439
of Neelakant Shastry, he had filed O.S.No.150/1999 along
with his mother Smt.Lakshmidevamma wherein Smt.Arathi
daughter of Shamaladevi i.e., respondent No.6 herein and
Smt.Akkamahadevi @ Shamaladevi i.e., respondent No.5
are also parties to the proceedings. The said suit was
dismissed. There is a finding to the following effect at
paragraph 60 of the judgment in the above stated suit,
which reads as follows:
"60. From the evidence on record, it is lucidly
established that Plaintiff No.2(a) Shyamaladevi is
the legally wedded wife of deceased Neelakanta
Shastry and Plaintiff No.2(b) Arathi is their
daughter. Further, it is established that the
Plaintiff No.7 is the second wife of Neelakanta
Shastry and Plaintiff Nos.3 to 6 are their
illegitimate children. To be more precise, it is
established that Plaintiff No.2(a) and Plaintiff
No.2(b) are the Legal Representatives of deceased
Neelakanta Shastry whereas Plaintiffs No.3 to 6 are
the illegitimate children of deceased Plaintiff No.2.
It is further established that plaintiff No.7 to obtain
the pension and death benefit of deceased
Neelakanta Shastry has put forth the theory that
she is also called by name Jayamma @
NC: 2025:KHC:1439
Shyamaladevi, which cannot be accepted.
However, Plaintiffs No.3 to 6 are also the Legal
representatives of deceased Neelakanta Shastry.
But they are not entitled for any share in the suit
schedule properties in view of findings given on
issues No.1 to 3. As such, I am inclined to hold
Additional issue No.1 partly in the "affirmative"."
From the above finding, it is clear that respondent Nos.5
and 6 in the present writ petition are the legal
representatives of Late Neelakant Shastry, whereas the
petitioner herein is the second wife of Late Neelakant
Shastry. Based on the said finding of the Civil Court,
respondent Nos.1 and 2 cancelled the family pension
sanctioned to the petitioner and ordered payment of family
pension to respondent No.5.
4. It is submitted that RSA No.729/2022 arising out of
O.S.No.887/2011 and RSA No.2499/2018 arising out
O.S.No.150/1999 are pending consideration before this
Court.
NC: 2025:KHC:1439
5. It is an admitted fact that as on today, respondent
No.5 is receiving family pension. Admittedly, RSA
No.2499/2018 filed by the petitioner herein against the
finding of the trial Court, with regard to legal
representatives of Late Neelakant Shastry is pending. At
this point of time, no fault could be found with the action
of respondent Nos.1 and 2 in canceling family pension
sanctioned to petitioner and sanctioning family pension to
respondent No.5 based on the finding of the trial Court in
O.S.No.150/1999 which is in appeal in RSA No.2499/2018.
Respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall have to act in accordance
with the judgment and decree in O.S.No.150/1999. The
prayers made in both the writ petitions and entitlement to
family pension, either to the petitioner or to Respondent
No.5 would depend on the outcome of the above stated
RSAs pending before this Court. The above writ petitions
are disposed of with an observation that respondent
Nos.1 and 2 shall take action depending on the outcome of
the pending RSAs before this Court.
NC: 2025:KHC:1439
6. Learned counsel Sri.Avin would submit that under
communication dated 17.02.2021 addressed to the State
Bank of India, respondent Nos.1 and 2 have informed the
Bank to recover a sum of Rs.29,00,000/- from the
petitioner on the ground that since the petitioner was not
entitled for family pension, she has to re-pay the family
pension received till October 2018.
It is made clear that recovery would depend on the
outcome of the above stated pending RSAs.
For the present, recovery shall not be proceeded with
and recovery proceedings would depend on the outcome of
the pending RSAs.
Sd/-
(S.G.PANDIT)
JUDGE
MPK
CT - SN
