State of Jammu and Kashmir v. Sh. Bal Raj Sharma and Ors.

Leave granted.

We have heard learned counsel on hoth sides.

This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir dated July 10, 1992 made in Contempt Petition No. 2379/91. The admitted position is that one Smt. Melo Devi, a teacher, claimed her dues after her retirement. While the claims were under settle-ment, she filed a writ petition. Pending writ petition, she died. The son of Melo Devi, by name Bal Raj Sharma, was substituted as legal repre-sentative. When he was called upon to submit the claims, he had also set up the Will executed by his mother in favour of his son, viz., the grandson of Melo Devi, as to his entitlement to future pension. We are informed that the claims due on her retirement and the pension to which she was entitled as on the date of her demise were calculated and the amount was deposited in the Court. The only question, therefore, is; whether her grandson is entitled to the family pension ?

'Family' has been defined in Rule 11 of Schedule 15 of the .I & K CSR, Vol. II and para 240B(II) of CSR Vol. 1 thus :

"11. For purpose of these rules the term "family'' shall mean -

(a) Wife, (b) Husband, in case of female officer, ( c) (Minor) sons, ( d) Unmarried and widowed daughters, ( e) Brothers below the age of 18 years and unmarried or

widowed sisters, (f) Father, and (g) Mother".

"The term "family" for the purpose of Article 240B shall mean -

(a) Wife. in the case of male officer;

(b) Husband, in the case of a female officer;

(c) Sons;

( d) Unmarried and widowed daughters (including step

children and adopted children);

( e) Brothers below the age of 18 years and unmarried and

.widowed sisters;

(f) Father;

(g) Mother;

(h) Married daughters; and (i) Children of a pre-deceased son".

It would thus be seen that grandson is not one of the members of the family for which he is entitled to lay any claim on the basis of a Will said to have been executed by his grandmother. It would be seen that since her son Bal Raj Sharma is already an employee, he is not entitled to the family pemion. Under those circumstances, the High Court was clearly in error in directing payment of pension to grandson and also issuing c,.,ntempt for non-compliance of its order.

The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs. It is open to the respondent to withdraw the amounts which are stand deposited in the court.

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 7699 of 1996.

From the Judgment and Order dated 10.7.92 of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court in C.P. No. 2379 of 1991.

Ashok Mathur for the Appellant.

R.C. Pathak, Ms. Anjani Aiyagari and C.V.S. Rao for the Respon-dents.