AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sanjay Yadav, J.—With consent of both the counsel matter heard finally. Petitioner, widow of Late Narmada Prasad Sen who was in the employment under Water Resources Department on Work Charged and Contingency Paid Establishment, seeks direction to the respondents for grant of gratuity-cum-compassionate amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- in lieu of demise of her husband, who died on 30-01-2005.
The relief for grant of gratuity-cum-compassionate amount is being sought on the strength of the stipulations contained in the Circular No.
dated 22-01-2007; clause 12.1 whereof stipulates :-
Petitioner also relies upon the order dated 15-04-2008 passed by Executive Engineer, Quoti Canal Division, Rewa.
It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that though she has been extended the benefit of gratuity of Rs. 28,278 in lieu of demise of her husband; however, the amount of compensation has not been released. The same is being claimed vide this petition.
The respondents on being noticed have filed their reply denying the entitlement of petitioner for grant of compassionate amount. It is urged that the circular issued on 22-01-2007 whereby the scheme for amending gratuity-cum-compassionate amount in lieu of death of an employee belonging to Work Charged and Contingency Paid Establishment was not made effective from a retrospective date as would have covered the case of the petitioner whose husband died on 30-01-2005. It is accordingly urged that the Executive Engineer who passed an order on 15-04-2008 did not notice this aspect and despite of non-entitlement of the petitioner passed an order, which when scrutinized at appropriate stage was found faulty and, therefore, except the benefit of gratuity, compassionate amount could not be disbursed in favour of the petitioner.
There is considerable force in the submissions put forth on behalf of the respondents.
In absence of specific stipulations as to applicability of the circular dated 22-01-2007 from a retrospective date, the benefit thereunder cannot be extended in favour of the petitioner.
Since there is no illegality in denying the grant of compassionate amount to the petitioner in lieu of death of her husband, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. In the result, petition fails and is hereby dismissed. There shall be no costs.