High CourtsSINGLE BENCH(2017) 04 JH CK 0023

Bharthi College of Education through its Secretary vs The State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 4 April 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
Aparesh Kumar Singh
RESULT
Disposed
CASE NUMBER
2452 of 2015

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

82 paragraphs · 1,322 words
1.

Let the Allahabad Bank, Jasidih Branch, Deoghar through its

Branch Manager be impleaded as Respondent no.7 in the instant writ

petition, for which necessary correction shall be carried out by learned

counsel for the petitioner in the array of parties during course of the day.

2.

Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, State and the Union of

India.

3.

Petitioner is widow of Late Shridhar Dubey, a freedom fighter.

Petitioner was getting pension from the Education Department of the

State Government in lieu of services of her husband as Teacher in a Non

Government Aided School. She was also receiving the freedom fighter

pension under the SSS Pension scheme of the Ministry of Home Affairs,

Government of India. As per the letter dated 27.2.2015(Annexure-9) of

the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, her pension from the

Central Government under P.P.O No. 11574(POL) was suspended on the

grounds that she is receiving pension from the State Government. She

was asked to explain why the SSS dependent pension should not be

cancelled and the amount wrongly received be not recovered. This

aggrieved her to approach this Court with the prayer (1)(i) & (ii) herein

asking for quashing of the letter dated 27.2.2015 and for resumption of

the freedom fighter pension. Petitioner has also made a prayer for

issuance of duplicate pension book which relates to the pension being

received by her from the Education Department, Government of

Jharkhand in lieu of service rendered by her husband as a Teacher.

4.

Union of India in its counter affidavit have clarified the position as

per the statement at Para 23, which is quoted hereunder:-

"23. It is wrong and denied that the petition is filed bonafide and in the interest of justice. It is submitted that the answering respondent vide its letter dated 29.4.2016 had advised to review the case of Smt. Basanti Devi as per instructions issued vide this Ministry''s OM No. 45/03/2014-FF(P) dated 30.12.2015 and if found the petitioner eligible to receive the dependant family pension under SSS Scheme,1980. The Ministry vide its letter dated 29.0.4.2016 had issued directions to restore the dependant family pension in the light of this Ministry office memorandum No. 45/03/2014. FF(P) dated 30.12.2015 and 03.03.2016 w.e.f. the date of issue of the O.M dated 30.12.2015. It is most respectfully submitted that the respondent no.1 has now received a letter dated 19.05.2016 from the Chief Manager, CPCC, Allahabad Bank, Lucknow that the Bank has received the Ministry''s letter no. 11011/20/CZ/2013-FF(B) dated 29.04.2016 and it is submitted that the Bank would be starting the pension w.e.f. May 2016. In view of the above, this writ petition is liable to be disposed of".

5.

The Office Memorandum dated 30.12.2015 (Annexure-2) is also

enclosed to the counter affidavit. The instant office memorandum has

amended Para 6.1.2 of the revised policy guidelines for disbursement of

Central Samman Pension to be followed by authorized Public Sector

Banks, circulated by Ministry of Home Affairs, Freedom Fighter Division,

Government of India as shown in letter dated 6.8.2014. The revised Para

6.1.2 along with the instructions issued to the respective Banks as

contained in the instant office memorandum is quoted herein below:-

"2. Thus as per the para 6.1.2 of the revised policy guidelines, the upper ceiling of monthly income was not uniform for Govt. and private source of income. To remove the above anomaly, the matter has been considered in consultation with Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance, Government of India and it has now been decided to amend the said para 6.1.2 of the revised policy guidelines by introducing a uniform income limit of Rs. 20,000/- per month or Rs.2,40,000/- per year irrespective of whether it is from Govt. or a private source. Accordingly, Para 6.1.2 of the revised policy guidelines will now be read as under:-

6.1.2 The banks must ensure that a dependent pensions is not sanctioned to a spouse or a daughter of a freedom fighter if:- (i) The spouse / daughter is already employed in a Central or a State Government, Central / State PSU or local body and income from such job/ activity exceeds Rs.2,40,000/- per year or Rs. 20,000/- per month. (ii) In case the spouse/ daughter is working in a private sector or having his /her own business/ activity then income from such job/ activity exceeds Rs.2,40,000/- per year or Rs.20,000/- per month. (iii) The spouse / daughter is receiving a pension/ salary on account of his or her own job or by virtue of the previous employment of the deceased freedom fighter and income from such job/ activity exceeds Rs.2,40,000/- per year or Rs. 20,000/- per month

4.

It is, therefore, requested to issue instructions to all concerned to follow these instructions scrupulously and take certificate from the dependents of the freedom fighters about amount and his/ her source of income at the time of transferring of pension and also at the time of taking life certificate annually. All the banks are directed to review/ reconsider all those cases in which pension had been stopped on the grounds of multiple pensions received by the dependent spouse/ daughter keeping in view the above income ceiling of Rs.2,40,000 per year (or Rs.20,000/- per month). If found eligible, the pension may be released with immediate effect".

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Respondent

Bank after issuance of the amended guidelines restored the freedom

fighter pension to the petitioner widow from November 2016. However,

arrears of pension from April 2015 to October 2016 have not been

restored though petitioner is fully eligible as per the amended Para

6.1.2(iii). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under the State

Government petitioner is receiving less than Rs.20,000/- per month as

pension.

7.

So far as the prayer of the petitioner made in 1(iv) is concerned,

learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in Cont. Case(Civil) No.

219 of 2013 prosecuted for alleged willful disobedience of the order

dated 11.2.2013 passed in W.P.C. No. 2480 of 2012, learned Single Judge

of this Court has been pleased to order that son of the applicant would

be permitted to receive the reconstructed pension book of the

petitioner, now 91 years of age.

8.

Learned Government Advocate, Mr. Atanu Banerjee on instruction

from the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar submits that the matter

relating to issuance of duplicate pension book would be considered in

accordance with law by the competent authority within a reasonable

time.

9.

Consideration of all the background facts noted herein above,

therefore, lead to the conclusion that pursuant to the amendment in

para 6.1.2 of the revised policy guidelines, as incorporated in office

memorandum dated 30.12.2015 also, the Bank has also restored the

freedom fighter pension of the petitioner since November 2016, which

was earlier suspended by letter dated 27.2.2015(Annexure 9). For

consideration of the plea of the petitioner relating to release of freedom

fighter pension for the period April 2015 to October 2016, in terms of

the office memorandum dated 30.12.2015, quoted herein above,

petitioner is directed to approach herself or through authorized

representative before the Branch Manager of the Allahabad Bank,

Respondent no.7 with a fresh representation for consideration and

release of her arrears of pension. The competent authority under the

Bank / Branch Manager, Allahabad Bank, Respondent no. 7 would

consider the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law, her

eligibility in terms of the SSS Pension Scheme and also amended para

6.1.2 of the revised policy guidelines as incorporated in office

memorandum dated 30.12.2015 within a period of 4 weeks from the

date of such representation. Petitioner is also at liberty to represent

before the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar through herself or authorized

representative for issuance of duplicate pension book bearing no.

169458, which may also be considered in accordance with law within a

reasonable time and as per the directions contained in Cont. Case(Civil)

No. 219 of 2013.

10.

The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.