PETITIONER:
STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
SHRI BAL RAJ SHARMA & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 18/04/1996
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
G.B. PATTANAIK (J)
CITATION:
1996 SCC (4) 736 JT 1996 (5) 600
1996 SCALE (4)463
ACT
HEADNOTE
JUDGMENT
ORDER
Leave granted.
We have heard learned counsel on both 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. 2879/91. The admitted position is that one Smt. Melo Devi, a teacher, claims her dues after her retirement. While the claims were under settlement, she filed a writ petition. pending writ petition, she died. The son of Melo Devi, by name Bal Raj Sharma, was substituted as legal representative. When he was called upon to submit the claims, he had also set up the will executed be 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 J & k CSR, Vol. II and para 240 B (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, hi is not entitled to the family pension. Under those circumstances, the High Court was clearly in error in directing payment of pension to grandson and also issuing contempt for non-compliance of its order.
The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs. it is open the respondent to withdraw the amounts which are stand deposited in the court.