AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Shri M S Akhtar, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Chakrapani Vatsyayan, learned counsel for the respondents, are present.
The instant original application has been filed by the applicant seeking following relief:
“i.suitable order or direction, directing the respondents, particularly respondent no. 2 to bestow applicant the family pension arising out of death of her husband (late) Prem Prakash on 3.10.2025, and ensure month to month payment of the applicant said family pension to the applicant;
ii.suitable order or direction, directing the respondents to legitimately compute and release the entire amount of family pension accruing w.e.f. 4.10.2025 in favour of applicant along with 18% per annum interest.
iii.such other appropriate orders or direction as the Hon’ble Tribunal deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
The brief facts of the case are that the applicant has filed the instant original application seeking a direction to the competent authority of the respondents to decide her claim for grant of family pension in her favour on account of her deceased husband late Prem Prakash. Applicant has contended that seeking redressal of her grievance, she had preferred an application before the respondents but no decision has been rendered upon the same and her claim is lying pending for consideration.
At the outset, learned counsel for the applicant, referring to Annexure A-4 of the Compilation II of the OA, submits that seeking redressal of her grievance, applicant had preferred a representation dated 10.06.2026 before the respondents but the same has not been decided till date and thus, at this stage, the applicant would be satisfied if the instant original application is disposed of at this stage itself directing the competent authority amongst the respondents to decide the aforesaid representation in a time bound manner by way of a reasoned and speaking order.
Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicant’s counsel submitting that the instant case holds no merit and is liable to be dismissed accordingly.
I have considered the rival contentions.
Having regards to the facts and circumstances of the case, having perused the representation moved by the applicant (Annexed as Annexure A4 to the Compilation II of the OA) and considering the limited prayer made by the applicant’s counsel, it would be in the fitness of things if the instant OA is disposed of at this stage itself directing the respondents to decide the representation of the applicant. Accordingly, the instant original application is disposed of at this stage itself. The competent authority amongst the respondents is hereby directed to take a decision on the representation dated 10.06.2026 of the applicant in light of extant rules and provisions. The said decision be taken within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and be communicated to the applicant within 10 days of its passing, without fail. It is also clarified that before taking any decision on the representation of the applicant, notice will also be issued to the newly impleaded respondents affording opportunity to him to place his stand also. Needless to say, I have not commented anything regarding the merits of the case nor examined the same.
All associated MAs stand disposed of. No costs.