Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT. CHUNNI BEGUM versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt. Chunni Begum v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 59040 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 6076 (21 November 2005)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari ,J

     Heard counsel for the parties and perused the  record.

     It is not denied by the respondents that after retirement from service from Nagar Nigam, Kanpur Nagar., husband of the petitioner expired on 4.12.2000. She was getting family pension but the same is not being paid w.e.f. September,2004 to her.  

     The controversy of the instant writ petition is squarely covered by the controversy involved in Civil Misc. Writ No.21297 of 2004 Rasheed Ali  Vs.State of U.P. and others  decided on 20.9.2005.

   Sri B.S. Pankaj, counsel for the respondents- Nagar Nigam Kanpur Nagar does not deny the claim of the petitioner and states that the payment could not be made due to paucity of funds. However, despite time having been granted, no counter affidavit has been filed. In the circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by keeping this petition pending, hence the petition is being decided with the consent of counsel for the parties.

     In view of ratio decided in Rasheed Ali''s case (supra) this writ petition is allowed with the direction that the arrears of family pension of the petitioner from the due date till the date of payment shall be paid by the respondent nos. 2 and 3 with 10% compound interest within a period of one month from today otherwise the State Government  will act in accordance with law against the erring officials of Nagar Nigam and will also recover the legitimate amount due to the petitioner as arrears of land revenue within one month thereafter and pay the same to the petitioner forthwith within a week of recovery. Cost is assessed as Rs.5000/- on respondent nos. 2 and 3 to be paid to the petitioner within a month for not taking action for payment of family pension within and in making the widow of poor deceased employee run from pillar to post for her legitimate claim without any just cause. The respondent nos. 2 and 3 will also ensure payment of family pension to the petitioner, month by month, as and when it falls due.

21.11.2005

kkb


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.