Patna High Court
Basudeo Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 8 December, 2023
Author: Harish Kumar
Bench: Harish Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10869 of 2022
======================================================
Basudeo Singh Son of Late Pathlu Singh, resident of Mohalla Durga Charan
Lane, P.S.-Alamganj, District-Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Education, Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director (Secondary Education), Department of Education, Bihar,
Patna.
4. The District Education Officer, Hajipur at Vaishali.
5. The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Hajipur at Vaishali.
6. The Head Mistress, Raj Samposhit Balika Uchcha Vidhyalay, Hajipur.
7. The Accountant General (A and E) Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhu Nath Pathak, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Madanjeet Kumar, GP-20
For the Accountant General : Mr. Arun Kumar Arun, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 08-12-2023
Heard Mr. Prabhu Nath Pathak, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Madanjeet Kumar,
learned GP-20 and Mr. Arun Kumar Arun, learned counsel for
the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna.
2. The petitioner claiming himself to be husband of
Late Ragini Verma, who superannuated on 31.12.2018 from the
post of Assistant Teacher from Raj Samposhit Balika Uchcha
Vidhyalay, Hajipur, has filed the present writ petition seeking a
direction upon the respondents to ensure family pension as well
as other admissible dues to the petitioner.
Patna High Court CWJC No.10869 of 2022 dt.08-12-2023
2/4
3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that his
wife, Ragini Verma, died on 11.02.2019, leaving behind the
petitioner and two daughters, namely, Mona Mayank and Neha
Nidhi. In support of his claim, he also brought on record the
marriage certificate, Aadhar Card, passbook of the bank, death
certificate and the certificate of family member list issued by the
Circle Officer. It is further contended that, in fact, on account of
inadvertence, the name of the petitioner could not be mentioned
at appropriate column of the husband in the nomination paper,
which resulted into all such chaos and making it a basis, the
petitioner has not been allowed the family pension till date. He
next submitted that after the retirement of the erstwhile
employee, the P.P.O. had already been issued by the Accountant
General, Bihar, Patna and substantive retiral benefits have
already been bestowed to her. He, thus, submits that there is no
impediment in granting the benefit of family pension and other
admissible dues, as the petitioner being husband of the erstwhile
employee.
4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the
respondent no. 5. It is submitted that on being superannuated,
the pension authority was issued in favour of the deceased
employee with effect from 01.01.2019, however, she died on
Patna High Court CWJC No.10869 of 2022 dt.08-12-2023
3/4
11.02.2019
, moreover, prior to her death, all the retiral dues
have been paid to the deceased employee. It is next submitted
that the pension paper and the service book was submitted to the
Accountant General for fixation of pension, after due
verification done by the deceased employee. In the pension
paper, the column of nominee was cut by putting a cross in it.
The name of the petitioner had not been mentioned in the
service book and there was only photograph of deceased
employee attested by her and her daughter, namely, Mona
Mayank, was made as the nominee. In such circumstances, the
learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner may be
directed to bring the succession certificate or any other
document by which it can be conclusively be regarded the
petitioner as the husband of the deceased employee, then the
process of payment of family pension could be initiated.
5. This Court has heard the parties and perused the
materials. It is needless to observe that sufficient materials have
been brought on record in support of the claim of the petitioner,
showing him as the husband of the erstwhile employee, namely,
Ragini Verma. This Court further observe that the only thing
which is required to be done by the State authorities is to verify
the genuineness of the documents.
Patna High Court CWJC No.10869 of 2022 dt.08-12-2023
6. In such view of the matter, this Court deems it
proper to direct the District Programme Officer (Establishment),
Hajipur at Vaishali to examine the claim of the petitioner on the
basis of the documents which shall be made available to him
and for the said purpose, this Court also directs the petitioner to
file a proper representation before the respondent no. 5 along
with all the documents in support of his claim, showing his bona
fide that he is husband of the erstwhile employee, preferably
within a period of four weeks from today. In case, such a
representation along with necessary documents is filed on behalf
of the petitioner, the District Programme Officer
(Establishment), Hajipur at Vaishali shall consider and verify the
same and pass necessary order for family pension, in accordance
with law, preferably within a further period of eight weeks,
thereafter.
7. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands
disposed of.
(Harish Kumar, J)
shivank/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 12.12.2023.
Transmission Date NA
