Ku Rajni Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 6679 MP

                                                                               1                            WP-22090-2021
                                                The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                           WP-22090-2021
                                                     (KU RAJNI SHARMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)


                                       Jabalpur, Dated : 22-10-2021
                                               Heard through Video Conferencing.

                                               Shri M. Riyaz, counsel for the petitioner.
                                               Shri Darshan Soni, Government Advocate for the respondents/State.

The present petition is being filed challenging the orders/communications dated 27.07.2021 and 31.08.2021, passed by the

respondents no.2 and 3 by which the claim of the petitioner for grant of family pension has been rejected on the ground that the petitioner has received disability at the age of 32 years and in terms of the circular dated 04.02.2016 he is not entitled to family pension as the entitlement of family pension is only up to 25 years of age.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the similar controversy was came before this Court and was considered in Writ Petition No.25317/2019, decided on 30.07.2020 (Rukmani Tiwari Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and others) and while considering the circular of the State Government the

writ petition was allowed and the order rejecting the claim of the petitioner was quashed. The matter was relegated back to the authorities for fresh consideration. The aforesaid aspect was also considered in Writ Petition No.11077/2018 decided on 27.08.2019 (Rajesh Sinde Thr. Brother and Natural Guardian Sunil Vs. Finance Department) and the circular dated 04.02.2016 was considered by the Coordinate Bench and the petition was again allowed and the order impugned dated 02.01.2018 was quashed. It is submitted that the orders are fully applicable to the case of the petitioner; therefore, the order impugned rejecting the claim of the petitioner is unsustainable. He prays for a direction to the authorities to reconsider the case.

Counsel appearing for the State has objected to the aforesaid and Signature Not Verified SAN supported the impugned order and submitted that in terms of circular dated Digitally signed by TAJAMMUL HUSSAIN KHAN Date: 2021.10.23 10:20:51 IST 2 WP-22090-2021 04.02.2016 the case of the petitioner was rightly considered as she has attained the disability at the age of 32 years; therefore, she was rightly not found entitled for grant of family pension.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the controversy has been considered by this Court in the aforesaid cases

and the judgments are applicable to the case of the petitioner also, this Court deems it appropriate to relegate the matter back to the authorities for fresh consideration regarding the claim of the petitioner for family pension. The orders/communication impugned rejecting the claim of the petitioner are hereby quashed. The authorities are directed to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

Accordingly, the petition stands allowed and disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.

(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE

taj

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by TAJAMMUL HUSSAIN KHAN Date: 2021.10.23 10:20:51 IST