Telangana High Court
Mrs.Boppani Muthi Lingamma vs The State Of Telangana on 24 June, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
*****
WRIT PETITION NO.29492 of 2021
Between:
Mrs. Boppani Muthi Lingamma
...Petitioner
AND
1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Govt. of
Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad and four others.
...Respondents
COMMON JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON: 24.06.2024
SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
1. Whether Reporters of Local : Yes/No
newspapers may be allowed to see
the Judgment ?
2. Whether the copies of judgment : Yes/No
may be marked to Law
Reports/Journals
3. Whether Their Lordship/Ladyship : Yes/No
wish to see the fair copy of
judgment
_____________________
JUSTICE K.SARATH
::2::
SK, J
W.P.No.29492 of 2021
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
+ WRIT PETITION NO.29492 of 2021
%Dated 24.06.2024
# Mrs. Boppani Muthi Lingamma
...Petitioner
and
1. $ The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Govt. of
Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad and four others.
...Respondents
! Counsel for Petitioner : Sri Venkat Reddy Donthi Reddy,
Learned Senior Counsel for the
petitioner
^ Counsel for Respondents : Learned Asst. Govt. Pleader for
Panchayat Raj and Rural
Development
< GIST :
> HEAD NOTE :
? Cases referred :
1.2022 SCC OnLine Bom 1068
::3::
SK, J
W.P.No.29492 of 2021
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
WRIT PETITION No.29492 of 2021
ORDER:
Heard Sri Venkat Reddy Donthi Reddy, learned
Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Learned
Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and
Rural Development for the respondents and perused the
entire material on record.
2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner
submits that after death of the husband of the
petitioner, the petitioner has applied for Aasara Pension
under Social Security Pension Scheme initiated by the
erstwhile State Government in the year 2006-07. After
considering the eligibility of the petitioner, the concerned
authorities have sanctioned an amount of Rs.1000/-
(Rupees One Thousand only) per month towards pension
to the petitioner vide I.D.No.NGKERO3187 and the same
was paid uninterruptedly till the year, 2015. While it is
::4::
SK, J
being so, the respondent No.4 in the Month of August,
2015 has withheld the pension of the petitioner.
Thereafter, the petitioner made an application under
Right to Information Act, for which on 20.06.2020, the
respondent No.4 had furnished the information stating
that as the daughter-in-law of the petitioner is a State
Government Employee, the petitioner becomes ineligible
for the said Aasara Pension and withheld the said
pension from the year, 2015.
3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner
further submits that the sons of the petitioner are
married and the elder son of the petitioner is
handicapped and he is unemployed and his wife is a
Government Teacher in Zilla Parishad High School,
Gomaram Village, Shivampet Mandal, Medak District
and they live away from the petitioner and the petitioner
is the age old women with infirmities. On 25.07.2020,
the petitioner has submitted a representation to the
respondent No.4 requesting to restore the Aasara
::5::
SK, J
Pension. But, no action was taken by the respondents.
Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed
W.P.No.17813 of 2020 before this Court, wherein this
Court vide order dated 13.07.2021 has disposed of the
said writ petition by directing the respondents to
consider the representation dated 25.07.2020 made by
the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of
two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of the
said order. But the respondents have rejected the
representation of the petitioner for grant of Aasara
Pension by relying upon the condition No.4.III.B.(ii) of
G.O.Ms.No.17, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development,
dated 05.11.2014 in the impugned order.
4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner
further submits that as per the said condition
No.4.III.B.(ii) of G.O.Ms.No.17, Panchayat Raj and Rural
Development, dated 05.11.2014, a person shall not be
eligible for Social Security Pension, if the person's
children is/are employed with Government/Public
::6::
SK, J
Sector/Private Sector employment/Outsourced/
Contract. But, in the instant case, the respondents have
withhold the pension of the petitioner on the ground
that daughter-in-law of the petitioner is a Government
Teacher and issued impugned proceedings
No.D/21/Aasara/2019-20 dated 16.08.2021. The
petitioner is not having any independent income and she
is living away from her children and she is not
dependent on her daughter-in-law and requested to
allow the writ petition.
5. In support of his arguments, learned Senior
Counsel for the petitioner relied upon the Judgment
passed by the High Court of Bombay in Sheetal Devang
Shah Vs. Presiding Officer of the Maintenance and
Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens and Ors. 1
6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for
Panchayat Raj and Rural Development appearing for the
respondents, basing on the counter-affidavit, submits
2022 SCC OnLine Bom 1068
::7::
SK, J
that before rejecting the representation made by the
petitioner, the respondent No.2 on 13.08.2021, has
conducted a personal hearing of the petitioner and her
elder son, wherein the petitioner and her son had
admitted that the daughter-in-law of the petitioner is a
Government Teacher at Medak. But, as per the terms
and guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.17, Panchayat Raj
and Rural Development, dated 05.11.2014, as the
petitioner is having an earning member in her family,
she is not eligible for Aasara Pension. As per the
instructions of the Government, the respondent No.4
and the Panchayat Secretary conducted re-verification of
the eligible pensioners in the village, wherein the name
of the petitioner was removed as she is having a earning
member in the family.
7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for the
respondents further submits that the Aasara Pension is
meant for the Single Woman and the persons, who are
having earning members in the family are not eligible for
::8::
SK, J
the same. In pursuance of the order dated 13.07.2021
passed by this Court in W.P.No.17813 of 2020, the
respondent No.2 has conducted a personal hearing with
the petitioner and her elder son, wherein they admitted
that the daughter-in-law of the petitioner is the working
Government Teacher and requested to dismiss the writ
petition.
8. After hearing both sides and on perusing the
material on record, this Court is of the considered view
that the respondent authorities have granted Aasara
Pension under Social Security Pension Scheme to the
petitioner in the year, 2006-07 and the same was
discontinued in the year, 2015 on the ground that
daughter-in-law of the petitioner is a State Government
employee. In the said scheme, the Government in
G.O.Ms.No.17, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development,
dated 05.11.2014 has issued comprehensive guidelines
with regard to eligibility for Aasara Pension (Socio-
::9::
SK, J
economic criteria) and the relevant portion of the said
G.O., is as follows:
"4. III. B. Socio - economic criteria: Aasara
pensions are meant only for
disadvantaged families who, in old age or upon being
widowed have no earning member in the family.
Earning members in the families are expected by law
to look after their parents. Similarly, persons with
disabilities are severely stymied by their levels of
handicap that renders them to be ineffective and
excluded by society and family: therefore, they need
financial support. Accordingly, there is a need for
exclusion and inclusion criterion to be taken in to
consideration for the grant of social security pensions
under the Aasara Scheme. The persons belonging to
the households fulfilling one or more of the following
conditions listed below shall not be eligible for
Social Security Pensions:
i. xxx
ii. Having children who are Government/
Public sector/Private sector employment/
Out-sourced /contract;
iii. xxx"
9. In the instant case, none of the petitioner's
children are working in the Government/Public Sector
/Private Sector/Outsourcing/Contract. The impugned
proceedings vide No.D/21/Aasara/2019-20, dated
16/08/2021 passed on the ground that the daughter-in-
::10::
SK, J
law of the petitioner is working as Government Teacher.
The Spouse, Children and Parents of the concerned
Government servant only are the dependents, as per
service conditions of the State Government employees.
10. As per definition in Section 2(a) of the
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens
Act, 2007, daughter-in-law not included as children.
The section 2(a) of the Maintenance and Welfare of
Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 is as follows:
"2(a). "children" includes son, daughter, grandson and
grand-daughter but does not include a minor."
11. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
petitioner in support of his contentions relied upon the
Judgment passed by the High Court of Bombay in
Sheetal Devang Shah vs. Presiding Officer of the
Maintenace and Welfare of Parents and Senior
Citizens and Ors. (supra) and the relevant portion of
the said Judgment at Para No.62 is as follows:
::11::
SK, J
"62. We have reservations about such direction to Sheetal Shah
to pay maintenance amount to Nalini Shah. As already observed,
in Section 2(a), 'children' include son, daughter, grandson and
grand-daughter and there is no reference to the daughter-in-law.
Be that as it may, upon perusal of the original record, we do not
find a single document showing the earnings of Sheetal Shah. In
that view of the matter, the Impugned Order, to the extent that it
directs Sheetal Shah to pay Rs. 25,000/- along with her husband
Devang Shah to Nalini Shah and Mahendra Shah, cannot be
legally sustained. However, so far direction given to Devang Shah
to pay the said maintenance amount to Nalini Shah, the same is
legally sustainable."
The above said Judgment squarely apply to the
facts of the instant case.
12. The petitioner is mother-in-law of the State
Government servant and she cannot be considered as a
dependent of the daughter-in-law and she cannot get
any benefit as a dependent from employment of her
daughter-in-law. In view of the same, the impugned
order passed by the respondents is liable to be set aside.
13. In view of the above finding, the Writ Petition
is allowed by setting aside the impugned proceedings
No.D/21/Aasara/2019-20 dated 16.08.2021 and the
::12::
SK, J
respondent-authorities are directed to continue the
Aasara Pension Scheme/Social Security Pension Scheme
to the petitioner and pay the arrears from the date of
discontinuation of Aasara Pension, within two (02)
months from the date of receipt of copy of this Order.
However, there shall be no order as to costs.
14. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall
also stand closed.
_____________________
JUSTICE K.SARATH
Date:24.06.2024
spk
